The return of the sandhill crane to Wisconsin is a conservation success, but now the state needs to manage the population and the crop damage the birds can cause. (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources)

Republicans in the Legislature have been working for years to pass legislation that would allow sandhill cranes to be hunted in Wisconsin. GOP lawmakers have introduced several bills on the issue. 

A 2024 legislative study committee assessed ways in which lawmakers could help manage crop damage caused by the birds as well as how to manage a crane hunt. But after introducing a package, they amended it down to just a crane hunt measure. 

GOP lawmakers have spent a few weeks working to pass legislation that would add some regulations on the use of high powered wake boats on the state’s water bodies. The boats have drawn ire from lakeshore residents across the state because of the large waves they create, which can damage shorelines. People also often bring the boats to several different boats, which raises the risk of spreading invasive species in the boat’s ballast. 

Both bills have drawn criticism from members of the public. Environmental and wildlife advocates have questioned the crane bill’s lack of crop damage provisions and complained that Republicans are pushing through a hunt without fully understanding current science. 

The wake boat bill has drawn complaints that it is too friendly to the wealthy wake boat owners and weakens local authority to establish more stringent wake boating rules. 

On Thursday, when the Republican-authored wake boat bill introduced just 10 days earlier came up for a vote on the Assembly floor, GOP members  offered an amendment that jammed in the Republican-authored crane hunt proposal. 

Democrats objected to the last minute combination, with Reps. Angela Stroud (D-Ashland) and Vincent Miresse (D-Stevents Point) calling it “bad governance.” 

“I’m quickly trying to read the amendment to see which of the bills this is, is it the one from the study committee that a bipartisan committee put together, or is it the one that was totally butchered in the Senate, and I don’t have time to read through it, because this is just bad governance,” Stroud said. “I’m going to be a no because these are two different bills completely. But I just want to point out, as I probably just said, that this is not what the people from Wisconsin expect us to be doing when we’re voting on things that deeply affect them.” 

Miresse said the passage of the wake boat bill prioritizes the input of wealthy boat owners and was rushed at the expense of “the vast majority of stakeholders” who were “united against this bill.”

Rep. Shae Sortwell (R-Two Rivers) said it only makes sense to combine the bills because cranes live in marshy areas. 

“I know that it’s common on that side of the aisle to get confused when we’re trying to do good government here, but let me walk them through the germaneness of how these are two very relevant and important things to have together,” he said. “For those who aren’t aware, Sandhill Cranes like to nest near water lines. They like to be in marshy areas. You know, where we often find marshy areas around? Lake shores. You know what’s a great way to protect our lake shores, keeping those high speed, high wake boats away from those shorelines.”

The vote on the combined bill caused further controversy when Republicans moved ahead with a voice vote while Democrats tried to call for a roll call vote. The spat froze the work of the Assembly while every Democrat lined up to record the vote against the combined legislation, which has now been sent to the Senate. 

Hours later, when the standalone Republican bill to establish a sandhill crane hunt came up as originally scheduled, Miresse addressed the body about wake boats. 

“I’m here to talk about wake boats today,” he said to laughter from the Democratic side of the floor.

Republicans said that Wisconsin has a “sandhill crane problem,” noting that the resurgence of the crane population is a conservation success story but now there are too many. 

Rep. Paul Tittl (R-Manitowoc) said the bill supports the state’s farmers and hunters. 

“This bill is about supporting hunters, farmers and getting serious about sandhill crane management here in our state,” Tittl said. “We can’t stand by and let other people dictate our state’s conservation policy on sandhill cranes just because it’s a pretty bird. I agree it is a beautiful bird, and so is a wood duck. I think deer is majestic. Well, so I challenge you now if you support science and facts, hunters, farmers and most importantly, our Wisconsin State Constitution, the vote is yes.”

But Rep. Karen DeSanto (D-Baraboo), whose district includes the International Crane Foundation, questioned how hunting cranes in the fall would prevent farm fields from being damaged in the spring. 

“We need a more comprehensive approach that includes more than just a hunt, because a limited fall hunt would have little impact on spring crop damage,” DeSanto said.

Anti-rights of nature 

Republicans also passed a bill 54-41 that would prohibit local governments from passing ordinances protecting the rights of nature. The bill was introduced after Green Bay and Milwaukee have passed or discussed establishing largely symbolic ordinances protecting the rights of bodies of water to be kept clean. 

The concept stems from provisions in the constitutions of some South American countries and Native American tribes such as Wisconsin’s Ho-Chunk Nation. In American law, environmental activists have been pushing for the legal rights of nature for decades, Rep. Andrew Hysell (D-Sun Prairie) noted. 

“People who have a meaningful relation to the body of water, whether it be a fisherman, a canoeist, a zoologist or a logger, must be able to speak for the values which the river represents and which are threatened with destruction,” Hysell said.

A separate bill, authored by Miresse and introduced last year without any movement, would recognize the natural rights of Devil’s Lake State Park. 

Republicans say such ordinances are communist and anti-business while Democrats point to legal interpretations that recognize corporations as people as setting a precedent. 

“I’d like to thank the authors for bringing this bill. I think it’s worthy of discussion,” Miresse said. “To ensure a livable future, we must restore balance with our natural world, and that means changing how our laws treat nature. Instead of viewing rivers, forests, ecosystems as materials for consumption and dumping grounds, we must recognize their inherent rights to exist, thrive, regenerate and be restored.”

Rep. Joy Goebben (R-Hobart), the bill’s co-author, said it would protect property rights. But Rep. Lindee Brill (R-Sheboygan Falls) complained that Democrats want to protect nature but not fetuses.

“I find it rich that the other side of the aisle talks about inherent rights of water, trees and air. Yet … they produced an amendment to kill children after birth in the womb. So while they talk about drinking water being a luxury, human life should be a luxury that should be valued in this place, and instead, they make a mockery of it.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Milwaukee County Courthouse (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

If your local court is struggling with a backlog of cases then help is on the way — except for people living in Milwaukee County. Although initially included in a Republican effort to fund more legal staff statewide, Milwaukee was largely removed from a bill authorizing additional circuit court and criminal justice system positions, in a move both Democratic and Republican lawmakers have said was purely political. 

On Thursday, lawmakers voted to pass the Assembly version of that bill (AB 514) during an Assembly floor session. Under its original form — authored by Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Gillett) and Rep. David Steffens (R-Howard) — the bill would have provided Milwaukee County with funding for four assistant district attorney positions, four assistant state public defender positions, and six support staff positions for the Public Defender’s Office by 2028. 

That aid is sorely needed in Milwaukee, where courts are burdened by thousands of unresolved cases, Wisconsin Watch reported. The backlog creates situations where cases are dismissed, people are held in custody for excessive periods waiting for trial, and attorneys on both sides of cases are overwhelmed. “Justice delayed, justice denied,” is how Kent Lovern, Milwaukee County’s District Attorney, described the backlog’s consequences. Yet in late January, the bill was amended to cut assistance for Milwaukee except for additional assistant prosecutor positions. 

When questioned about the cuts during an early February Senate hearing, Steffens said “there were certain things that had to be done” in order to get unanimous support for the bill among his fellow Republicans. Other counties, including Waukesha, Green Bay, Menomonee, Kenosha, Richland, Sauk, Ozaukee, Washington, Jefferson, Eau Claire, and numerous others didn’t see cuts in the number of additional public defenders the bill supports. 

Since the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020, courts across the state have battled backlogs and staffing shortages. In August 2025, Wisconsin Watch reported, there was a backlog of 12,586 felony cases across the entire Wisconsin court system. Currently, according to Wisconsin Watch, there are over 10,000 unresolved felony cases in Milwaukee County’s court system.

Answering questions from Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee), Steffens explained that the original bill was designed based on clear and “clinical” needs assessments. “However,” said Steffens, “there does become a period where politics sometimes gets involved. And the substitute that was passed, again unanimously in the Assembly, did reflect some of those political pressures.” Instead of ensuring Milwaukee’s justice system gets the resources it needs now, Steffens said there would be “a continued opportunity through the next budget” to accomplish that.

“People have different positions on things all the time, and we have to respond to that as bill authors,” said Steffens. “I will say this, though, with every piece of legislation we introduce we have an opportunity to do nothing, something, or everything. This is quite something. This will be the largest increase in well over 15 years for these positions. The people who have been working on this look at this as a historic opportunity. If you are looking for perfection in this bill, you will not find it.”

Steffens declined to say which Republican lawmakers did not want to support Milwaukee County’s court system.

In a statement to Wisconsin Examiner, State Public Defender Jennifer Bias stressed the need for more defense attorneys in the court system. “Wisconsin has a dire need for more public defender staff statewide,” Bias said in an emailed statement. “Even in its amended form, this bill is a big step in the right direction and has the full support of our agency.”

On the Assembly floor Thursday evening, Steffens said that over his nearly 12 years in the legislature, he has worked with the Republican majority (which he noted has maintained “nearly uninterrupted control” for 30 years) to pass new crime laws or measures to enhance existing crime laws hundreds of times. Steffens said he was unaware of how this would shape the court system, and that the thousands of case backlogs is a sign that he and other lawmakers have failed the court system. He recounted hearing about a man in the Brown County Jail, who claimed he was innocent, and spent over a year waiting his case to conclude. As a result, he lost his job, his wife, and his job.

“That’s not justice,” said Steffens. “The Constitution guarantees that every person shall be provided with a speedy trial. We’ve been denying that to people throughout this state. In Brown County alone, we have a backlog of 8,000 cases.” Steffens added, “I’m trying to make up for my errors, my failure as a legislator, and I hope you’ll join me.”

Recalling a colleague who said that the bill “is the cost of being a law and order state,” he declared, “it’s time to pay that bill, and we’re going to do it by hiring these people. So I hope you’ll all join me in supporting this bipartisan piece of legislation and making a substantial step forward in restoring some measure of justice for all the people in Wisconsin.”

After Steffens spoke a voice vote was called on the bill. Some lawmakers very audibly yelled “no!” but were unable to stop the bill from passing and being messaged to the Senate. 

Safety and support for everyone, except if you live in Milwaukee

“We see time and time again that Milwaukee County is blamed for its criminal activity,” Johnson said in frustration during an interview earlier this week. “We’re blamed for the rise in crime in other suburban areas, and other surrounding areas in Milwaukee, but this is a clear indication of why that continues to happen. Because when we have opportunities such as this…And I’m upset that other counties are getting these resources. If they need them, they deserve them. Milwaukee deserves those same measures of safety and security, too.” A spokesperson for Steffens said that he was unavailable for comment, and Wimberger’s office didn’t respond to Wisconsin Examiner’s request. 

Johnson said that the motivation to cut Milwaukee out of the court support bill stemmed from a conflict involving the district attorney’s office, public defender’s office and a court watch group called Enough Is Enough. The group is dedicated to Erin Mogensen, a 32-year-old Shorewood woman who was pregnant when a driver crashed into and killed her in 2023. Enough Is Enough monitors similar cases in the court system, and has issued reports suggesting that judges delivered sentences in reckless driving and fleeing cases that were more lenient than what prosecutors recommended. 

Last fall, two regional managers of the Wisconsin State Public Defender’s Office issued a letter to judges in the Milwaukee County Circuit Court’s criminal division accusing Enough Is Enough of being little more than “an extension of the DA’s office,” the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported. The defenders obtained 258 emails from a public records request, showing “extensive meetings” between members of Enough Is Enough and the Milwaukee County DA’s office. Current and former assistant district attorneys were involved in the meetings, and even worked to review and draft letters from Enough Is Enough addressed to the judiciary. The public defenders warned the judges to consider this when evaluating impact statements or the presence of Enough Is Enough. 

Both the group and the DA’s office pushed back against the public defenders’ accusations, the Journal Sentinel reported. Lovern acknowledged that he was approached by the group’s members in 2024, when he announced his bid for district attorney after John Chisholm retired. By the time Lovern became DA, Enough Is Enough had obtained 501(c)3 status. Lovern said he offered the group access where appropriate and assistance from his office. 

Rep. Bob Donovan (R-Greenfield) jumped to the group’s defense, accusing the public defender’s office of trying to intimidate and discredit what Donovan called a “volunteer” and “grassroots” organization. Donovan had backed Enough Is Enough since its inception, has focused on the issue of  reckless driving in recent years, according to the Journal Sentinel. Donovan didn’t respond to a request for comment for this story. 

“When we talk about how things in this building can be political,” Johnson told the Wisconsin Examiner, speaking of the state Capitol, “this is a perfect example of a petty argument between two factions of the court system can be interjected by somebody in the state Legislature that just takes this argument to a whole new [level].” 

The decision to strip the public defender positions from Milwaukee will only worsen the court backlog, Johnson said. “So you’re going to make things more complicated simply because you’re being petty,” she told the Examiner. “And what really pisses me off is the fact that we know in this building that if the rest of the state is taken care of with their needs, and the only entity that has a need is Milwaukee County, it will not get met. Because we’ve seen them slight Milwaukee County before…You don’t get to trump public safety for hundreds of thousands of people simply because you’re being petty, and petty politics is playing into this state Legislature, and their responsibility to an entire county.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Lawmakers applauded the family of the late Gail Zeemer after voting to concur in the passage of “Gail’s Law.” The bill expands insurance coverage for breast cancer screening. It passed with a unanimous 96-0 vote. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

During its final planned day of legislative business this year, the Wisconsin Assembly passed a bill to ensure health care coverage of screenings for women at high risk of breast cancer and a bill to extend postpartum Medicaid coverage to a year.

Republican lawmakers announced Wednesday evening that they would vote on the bills, breaking gridlock on the issues which for years was held up by Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester). Vos, who announced his retirement at the beginning of the floor session Thursday, reversed his position and voted in favor of both bills.  

Each bill passed the Senate in nearly unanimous votes last year, and the Assembly concurring votes will send the bills to Gov. Tony Evers for a signature. 

Lawmakers honor Gail Zeemer as they pass breast cancer screening bill

SB 264 requires health insurance policies to provide coverage for diagnostic breast examinations and for supplemental breast screening examinations for women with dense breast tissue. The bill would require coverage to include no patient cost-sharing. 

The family of Gail Zeemer, a Neenah woman who spent time advocating for the legislation before her death from breast cancer in 2024, sat in the Assembly gallery. Zeemer, who had dense breast tissue, was diagnosed with cancer at a late stage after not receiving additional screening. She battled cancer for eight years and passed away in June 2024 at the age of 56.

Lawmakers applauded her family after voting to concur in the bill, named “Gail’s Law.” It passed in a unanimous 96-0 vote.  

Rep. Robyn Vining (D-Wauwatosa) spoke about listening to testimony from Zeemer during a hearing on the bill prior to her death in the Assembly Health committee.

“She was full of strength and determination,” Vining said. “This year, as we’ve heard testimony, her absence was felt in the room. Today is the day that she fought for, and I am so sorry that Gail is not here with us today. Gail’s law will save lives. It will prevent preventable deaths.”

“You didn’t give up. You didn’t take no for an answer,” Vining said of Zeemer’s family and other advocates for the bills.

Several lawmakers, including Rep. Nate Gustafson (R-Omro) and Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie), teared up as they spoke of their support for the legislation.

“It’s about families,” Nedweski said of the bill. “Too many husbands have lost their wives to breast cancer, too many parents have had to say goodbye to a daughter too soon, and too many children have seen their mother’s hair fall out and have had to cry themselves to sleep while their mothers went through chemo, surgery and radiation, sometimes only to be told the cancer is back, and there are no other options.” 

Nedweski said the bill takes an important step to “help children keep their moms.” 

“Mammography simply does not work for everyone,” she added. 

Nedweski said the bill is a “wise investment,” noting that it is why Texas and Florida have adopted similar policies. “Gail’s law is not only life-saving, it is cost-saving. Detecting cancer early not only drastically increases survival rates, it means that treatment costs will be lower for patients and for families.” 

Women with dense breast tissue have a higher risk of breast cancer and it can make it harder for radiologists to see cancer on mammograms, according to the American Cancer Society. 

Insurance policies in Wisconsin are already required to provide coverage for two mammograms for women between the ages of 45 and 49 and annual screenings for women over the age of 50, but insurance companies are not required to cover additional screenings for women with dense breast tissue or at higher risk. 

Bipartisan support for the bill did not prevent partisan bickering during debate. Republican lawmakers complained in a press conference announcing the bill scheduling and again on the floor about Democratic lawmakers’ prior actions urging a vote.

Rep. Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc) said that the eight Republican Assembly lawmakers were the “true heroes who fought for where we are today.” 

“I celebrate them, rather than the tantrum throwing we saw leading up to this,” she said.

Others highlighted the bipartisan nature of the bills. 

Rep. Lee Snodgrass (D-Appleton) thanked Sen. Rachael Cabral-Guevara (R-Appleton), a key supporter of the legislation, and Rep. Dean Kaufert (R-Neenah), who called for lawmakers to go to partisan caucus to discuss the measure on Wednesday. GOP lawmakers credit discussion during the caucus for the recent breakthrough. 

“I know that this body is contentious often. I know that some of us don’t even like each other, but when we can come together and do something good for women’s health and the people of Wisconsin,” Snodgrass said, “it’s truly a victory.” 

Some lawmakers said that Wisconsin still needs to do more to ensure that people can access health care in the state.

Margaret Arney (D-Wauwatosa) called the passage of the bill a “victory” but a “small step on a long road.” 

“We need to seriously stare in the face of what it takes for people to afford health care,” Arney said. “All the people in Wisconsin deserve to have health security and I invite us to take that step together.” 

Postpartum Medicaid extension

Wisconsin is poised to become the 49th state to accept a federal expansion of Medicaid coverage for women for one year after they give birth after the state Assembly approved SB 23. 

The bill passed 95-1. Rep. Shae Sortwell (R-Two Rivers) is the only lawmaker who voted against the bill. 

Evers, who most recently called on lawmakers to pass the bill and send it to him at his State of the State address on Tuesday evening, is likely to sign it.

Pregnant women can receive Medicaid coverage in Wisconsin if they have an annual income of up to 306% of the federal poverty level, however, currently they risk losing that coverage 60 days after giving birth. 

Rep. Patrick Snyder (R-Weston), the lead Assembly author on the bill, said he picked up the “mantle” on the issue because of what he heard while knocking doors during the campaign cycle. A previous author on the bill was former Republican Rep. Donna Rozar, who lost her reelection bid in 2024. 

Snyder also doubled down on criticizing Democratic lawmakers for their efforts to force a vote on the issue. “I had a night’s sleep and I realized that a lot of my Democrat colleagues who I’m friends with are following orders,” he said. 

“Thank goodness we beat Arkansas,” Snyder said, referring to the only other state in the U.S. that has not extended postpartum Medicaid coverage for a year. “Strong families will mean strong Wisconsin. That’s what I put my faith in, not trying to score political points.” 

Rep. Deb Andraca (D-Whitefish Bay) struck a more cordial tone. 

“I want to thank everyone here who changed their mind,” Andraca said. “That’s not easy.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Federal agents stage at a front gate as Reps. Ilhan Omar, Kelly Morrison and Rep. Angie Craig, all Minnesota Democrats, attempt to enter the regional Immigration and Customs Enforcement headquarters at the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building in Minneapolis on Jan. 10, 2026. The House members were briefly allowed access to the facility where the Department of Homeland Security has been headquartering operations in the state. (Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — As they seek to curb President Donald Trump’s aggressive approach to immigration enforcement, congressional Democrats are looking to formalize some guidelines previous administrations used.

Of the 10 policy proposals Democratic leaders offered in negotiations to reopen the Department of Homeland Security, which has been in a funding lapse since Feb. 14 in the midst of widespread uproar over the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens by immigration officers in Minneapolis last month, seven have been employed in at least some form by previous administrations.

Democrats are asking the Trump administration to reinstate policies it has rejected in its controversial push to carry out mass deportations. Prior policies Democrats want to formalize include use-of-force standards, allowing unannounced visits by members of Congress to facilities that detain immigrants and obtaining judicial warrants before entering private residences.

“Many of the things the Democrats are asking for are to revert to prior policies,” said Theresa Cardinal Brown, a senior DHS official during the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations. “Some of them are responding to the ways this administration is carrying out its operations that previous administrations did not.”

Formalizing the policies in law, as part of a deal to pass a fiscal 2026 funding bill for the department, would make them more permanent.

“Policies and guidance … apply as the current leadership applies them,” Cardinal Brown said. “They’re not absolutes, and they can be changed much more frequently.”

But an agreement between congressional Democrats and the White House on changes to immigration enforcement appears elusive. The White House’s response to the proposals was “incomplete and insufficient,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a Feb. 9 statement. 

No recent movement on negotiations

Democrats late Monday sent over a counterproposal to Republicans and the White House, but did not make public what those changes were, according to a statement from party leaders.

While there is bipartisan support for some of the proposals, like requiring body-worn cameras, others, such as barring immigration agents from wearing face coverings and requiring judicial warrants to enter private property, have been rejected outright by the Trump administration.

A White House official said the “Trump Administration remains interested in having good faith conversations with the Democrats.” 

“President Trump has been clear – he wants the government open,” according to the White House official.

Even with the department shut down, immigration enforcement will continue, due to $170 billion in funding in the massive tax cuts and spending package Trump signed into law last year. 

Democrats’ proposals do not include consequences if DHS doesn’t comply, which raises an issue of effectiveness, said Heidi Altman, vice president of policy at the National Immigration Law Center, an advocacy group that aims to provide free or low-cost legal services for immigrants.

“When Congress is negotiating policy measures, are they also putting teeth to those policy measures, and are they yanking away the funds that we know ICE and CBP will use to violate guardrails to begin with?” Altman said.

Changes demanded after Minneapolis deaths

After Renee Good was shot and killed by immigration officer Jonathan Ross on Jan. 7, lawmakers amended the Homeland Security funding bill to add guardrails, such as appropriating $20 million for body cameras and adding a requirement for DHS to report how funds from the tax cuts and spending package are being spent.

But a second death in Minnesota, that of intensive care unit nurse Alex Pretti on Jan. 24, spurred Democrats to reject funding for DHS without stronger policy changes to the enforcement tactics used by immigration officers at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection. 

Only three of the 10 proposals from Schumer and Jeffries, both of New York, would be entirely new. 

They are: prohibiting ICE and other immigration enforcement agents from wearing face coverings, barring racial profiling after the Supreme Court cleared the way for the practice last year, and standardizing uniforms of DHS agents.

The heads of ICE and CBP rejected Democrats’ request to have their immigration officers forgo face coverings when asked during an oversight hearing before the House Homeland Security Committee last week. 

Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons and CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott, along with congressional Republicans, have argued that masks and face coverings prevent their officers from being doxed. 

Local cooperation

Other proposals, including barring of immigration enforcement of so-called sensitive locations such as religious places, child care facilities, hospitals and schools, would expand previous DHS guidance that restricted enforcement in such places.

The Democratic proposal calls for enforcement to be prohibited at those sensitive locations. Prior guidance allowed for the practice on a limited basis.

Then-acting ICE Director Caleb Vitello rescinded the policy shortly after President Donald Trump took office in January last year. There are several lawsuits brought by religious groups challenging the move by the Trump administration.

A requirement that immigration officials gain permission from local and state governments before undertaking large enforcement operations like the one in Minneapolis would build on previous policies of federal-local cooperation.

But that measure would be a long shot, Cardinal Brown said.

“I think that’s going to be a hard one,” she said. “The federal government has the authority to enforce immigration law anywhere in the country it wishes.”

She said a more realistic option would be for the federal government to inform or coordinate with local authorities for large-scale immigration operations. 

Another proposed requirement that DHS officials present identification also builds on a previous policy.

Another proposal builds on DHS policy of targeted enforcement by ending “indiscriminate arrests,” without warrants.

Under current immigration law, if an officer encounters a person believed to be in the U.S. unlawfully and can escape before a warrant is obtained, a warrantless arrest is lawful.

Democrats want to increase standards on the forms ICE uses to authorize an arrest. These administrative forms are not signed by a judge but instead by an ICE employee.

Judicial warrants

The remaining proposals would revert DHS policies to those in place under prior administrations’ guidance. Those include use-of-force standards, use of body cameras when interacting with the public, allowing members of Congress unannounced oversight visits at detention centers that hold immigrants and requiring a judicial warrant to enter private property.

An internal ICE memo, obtained by The Associated Press, showed that Lyons instructed ICE agents to enter private residences without a judicial warrant – a departure from longstanding DHS policy.

“This judicial warrant issue is so disturbing,” said Ben Johnson, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, or AILA.  

He said the question of whether a warrant is needed to enter private property was already decided under the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment. 

“The fact that it’s being discussed now is really frightening,” Johnson said.

Body cameras

Providing funds for DHS to acquire body cameras for immigration officers is one proposal Democrats and Republicans seem to have agreed on.

Earlier this month, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem announced that body cameras would be provided to all immigration agents in Minneapolis, and said that as “funding is available, the body camera program will be expanded nationwide.”

During an oversight hearing on Capitol Hill, Lyons said about 3,000 ICE officers currently have body cameras with another 6,000 cameras on the way. Scott said  roughly 10,000 Border Patrol agents, about half the total force, have body cameras.

But body cameras are not a guarantee against misconduct, Altman said.

CBP officials were wearing body cameras when Pretti was shot and killed. Scott said that footage would be released after the investigation is over.

“We see officers in the field right now wearing body-worn cameras engaging in abuse and violence on the daily,” Altman said. 

Oversight visits

One of the proposals would also end a DHS policy to require members of Congress to provide seven-day notice of oversight visits at facilities that hold immigrants, despite a 2019 appropriations law that allows for unannounced visits.

Since last summer, several lawmakers have been denied oversight visits at ICE facilities prompting them to sue in federal court. 

On the day funding for DHS lapsed, Feb. 14, the Department of Justice submitted a brief, noting that because of the shutdown, unannounced oversight visits by lawmakers can be denied. 

The administration argued that during the shutdown, immigration enforcement has been funded by the tax cuts and spending bill, which does not include language allowing unannounced visits, rather than regular appropriations. 

“There is no lawful basis for the Court to enjoin Defendants’ conduct so long as the restricted funds have lapsed,” according to the document.

The Wisconsin Legislature is considering a bill to legalize online sports gambling. (Getty Images)

The Wisconsin Assembly on Thursday passed bills to legalize online sports betting and add state regulations for University of Wisconsin athletes receiving money for their name, image and likeness rights. 

Both bills passed with no or little debate and the NIL bill passed with just a single no vote. They will now be sent to the state Senate. 

Last fall, Republican lawmakers introduced the online sports betting bill with a lot of momentum. A public hearing on the measure just days after the bill’s introduction. 

The Wisconsin constitution requires that any legal gambling be managed by the state’s federally recognized Native American tribes. Under current law, people can place sports bets in person at tribal casinos but online sports bets — a market that has grown exponentially as legal sports gambling has spread across the country — remained prohibited. Under the bill, Wisconsin would follow a legal framework first established in Florida that would allow online sports betting if the infrastructure to manage the bets is housed on tribal land. 

The sports betting bill was introduced and hearings were held in both chambers of the Legislature in rapid succession, but the bill did not come up for a floor vote until the last day of the Assembly’s schedule. 

The Assembly passed the bill with bipartisan support despite objections from lobbying groups representing the country’s largest online sportsbooks. The state’s tribes have supported the legislation, arguing that the proliferation of live betting markets on websites such as Kalshi and the ease with which many Wisconsinites can cross the border to Illinois where online sports bets are legal, has damaged their business. 

The NIL bill adds regulations for how University of Wisconsin schools manage payment to collegiate athletes. The NCAA officially allowed collegiate athletes to be paid for appearing in advertisements or commercial products such as video games in 2021. 

Under the bill passed Thursday, student-athletes will be allowed to hire agents to represent them and individual universities can facilitate NIL agreements on behalf of their athletes. Students will not be allowed to endorse tobacco products, alcohol or illegal activities. Some records related to NIL agreements will be exempt from the state’s open records law “when competitive reasons require confidentiality.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) announced Thursday that he will not seek another term in office, putting an end to his tenure as the state’s longest serving top Assembly leader. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) announced Thursday that he will not seek another term in office, putting an end to his tenure as the state’s longest serving top Assembly leader.

Vos, who is Wisconsin’s 75th Assembly speaker, made the announcement ahead of Assembly lawmakers’ last scheduled floor session of the spring. He was at times on the verge of tears as he spoke. 

“When I first walked into this chamber, I could not have imagined how deeply this institution would shape my life, or profoundly I would come to believe in its purpose,” Vos said. “As I announce that I will not be running for reelection in November, I am struck by how much this work has shaped me, how honored I am to have played a small part in democracy, and how proud I am to know that the state of our Legislature is strong.”

Vos said the decision wasn’t easy. Revealing that he had a heart attack in mid-November, he said the incident gave him a “sign” that pushed him in the “right direction.” He said his doctor has determined that he is “perfectly fine,” but needs to reduce his stress. 

“Let me tell you, this job is stressful,” Vos said.

Vos, 57, was born in Burlington in Racine County and lists the village of Rochester as his home community. He was first elected to the state Assembly in 2004 after serving for 10 years on the Racine County Board. He was first chosen by his caucus to serve as speaker in 2013. 

“I have always believed that our republic, in order to remain healthy, the Legislature must be the strongest branch of government, not because it should dominate, but because it represents,” Vos said. “When legislatures grow weak, the people’s voice grows faint, when executives govern by unilateral fiat or action or courts are forced to resolve political questions, it’s often because legislators fail to do their job. My work here in the state Capitol has been guided by the conviction that this body must never surrender its authority, its responsibility or its relevance.” 

Gov. Tony Evers, who was first elected in 2018 and has had a contentious relationship with Vos, said in a statement that Vos’ retirement “marks the end of an era in Wisconsin politics.” Evers also decided to not seek another term in office in 2026.  

“I’m grateful to have served as governor during Speaker Vos’ tenure. Although we’ve disagreed more often than we didn’t, I respect his candor, his ability to navigate complex policies and conversations, and his unrivaled passion for politics,” Evers said. 

Vos and Evers had a shaky start to their working relationship even before Evers’ swearing-in in 2019. Under the leadership of Vos, Republican lawmakers worked to strip the executive branch of a number of powers during the lame-duck legislative session after the 2018 election.

In recent years, Vos, the Republican-led Legislature and Evers have been in numerous court battles over who holds certain powers, especially as Evers used his partial veto powers to make significant changes to state budgets sent to him by Republicans. 

“We strengthened legislative oversight, even though our court has weakened it. We reaffirmed the power of the purse, even though some want to take it away, and insisted that major policy decisions be made by elected representatives accountable to voters, not unelected state employees,” Vos said. “The Wisconsin State Legislature is not just where laws are passed, it’s where democracy slows itself down on purpose. We debate in public, we answer to voters, we live with the consequences of our decisions, right or wrong.”

As Assembly lawmakers rushed to finish up their legislative work this session before they go home to campaign, Republicans were seeking a way to spend part, or nearly all, of the state’s $2.5 billion projected budget surplus, though the negotiations appeared paused as of Wednesday.

“Robin’s one-of-a-kind, so I wish whoever becomes the next Assembly Speaker well. They’ll no doubt have their work cut out for them. Being in public service is challenging and can be thankless work, most especially when you’re responsible for getting things done. I understand that better than most,” Evers said. “For your sacrifices and your service over the years, thank you, Mr. Speaker.”

At times during his tenure, Vos dug in his heels on issues even when they had widespread bipartisan support. On Wednesday evening, Vos finally relented on two women’s health bills that he had blocked from receiving a vote. His switch came under pressure from members of his own caucus and as Democratic lawmakers also called for a vote.

“No accomplishment in this building is ever the work of one person,” Vos said. 

In his farewell speech, Vos thanked his staff along with Republican and Democratic members of the Assembly, saying they have “argued fiercely and disagreed passionately.” He also acknowledged his constituents in the 63rd district, which he represented for 12 years, as well as the voters of  the new 33rd district. Vos quipped that it was now his district under the “Evers gerrymander” — referring to new voting maps passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor, which are widely seen as undoing the gerrymandered maps that previously allowed Republicans to hold disproportionate legislative majorities.

“Thank you for placing your trust in me time and time again over the past two decades. I am deeply humbled by the confidence in my ability to serve Racine and Walworth counties, to my friends and neighbors who stood with me from the very beginning and every step,” Vos said, adding that they even stayed through his “recall or whatever.” 

Vos was targeted for a recall election in 2024 by supporters of President Donald Trump after he angered them by not supporting calls to decertify former President Joe Biden’s win in Wisconsin in 2020 and by not supporting the impeachment of Meagan Wolfe, the administrator of the Wisconsin Elections Commission. 

 

Throughout Vos’ tenure as speaker, Republican lawmakers have held an iron grip on their control of the state Assembly with Republican lawmakers winning their seats under maps that were determined to be an unconstitutional gerrymander in 2023. 

Vos has not always gotten his way in negotiations. After the state Supreme Court ruling on the old voting maps, Vos first proposed that the state adopt an “Iowa-style redistricting commission,” which failed to get enough support in the state Senate, before agreeing to pass new maps proposed by Evers. 

Those new maps have put control of the Assembly and Senate up for grabs in 2026. 

Republican Party of Wisconsin Chairman Brian Schimming said in a statement that Vos has “been influential to Republican politics for decades” and thanked him for his “his tireless service and dedication to Republican successes.” 

The Democratic Party of Wisconsin Chair Devin Remiker said Vos spent his tenure trying “his best” to make state government “dysfunctional and leave working people with higher costs and fewer rights.” He said history would remember him “as a little man who was only remarkable for his gift of still managing to punch down despite his own smallness.”

Vos is not the only Republican with retirement plans this session. Others include Rep. Dave Murphy, Sen. Steve Nass and Sen. Rob Hutton. 

“My time has lasted quite a while, but my service in this chamber will end when the new class of freshmen are sworn in,” Vos said. “I’ve been so honored to serve with all of you in this chamber, and I will miss many of you, but not all of you, but to those of you who I will miss, and actually all of you, I appreciate your service.” 

“I’ll miss the clowns, but not the circus,” he added.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear waves to the audience after delivering his State of the Commonwealth address on Jan. 7, 2026, in Frankfort. (Photo by Arden Barnes/Kentucky Lantern)

WASHINGTON — Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear’s faith calls him to address hunger, health access and community care, he said during an event Thursday at the progressive Center for American Progress that previewed a potential campaign in the 2028 cycle.

The Trump administration has “hijacked” faith, the Democrat said, leading to harm instead of helping people. He pointed to the repercussions of the major tax cuts and spending package Republicans passed last year that paid for tax cuts by making changes to food assistance and health care that will result in millions of people losing access to those safety nets.

“Are we using faith to help people or to hurt people?” he said. “It’s that simple.”

More than 100,000 people are expected to be kicked off SNAP and 25 rural hospitals are at risk of closing in Kentucky alone, he said.

“The reason why I talk about faith is it motivates me. (It’s) why I’m willing to get up no matter how mean and cruel the world has gotten and fight to make it just a little bit better,” he said.

Upcoming White House bid?

Beshear, 48, is widely expected to make a presidential run in 2028, and did not rule out a bid when members of the audience asked how he would govern if he won the presidency. 

Like previous presidential hopefuls, he’s gearing up for a book tour. He told the think tank his upcoming book explores how his Christian faith has led him through challenging times as governor, from the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic to deadly tornadoes, and how he believes those values can heal the deep polarization of the country.

“In the end, where we’ve got to go is … I hope that you would say that you are an American long before you’d say you are a Democrat or Republican,” Beshear said.

Beshear was a top candidate for 2024 Democratic nominee Kamala Harris’ running mate before she selected Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz.

Immigration

An audience member asked Beshear how he would address immigration if he were president. The issue has dominated political discourse since the deadly shootings of two U.S. citizens by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis last month. 

Beshear said that every federal immigration officer needs to be retrained, and he expressed concerns about what he called constitutional violations, such as agents entering private residences without a judicial warrant.

“What we see with (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) is an out-of-control law enforcement agency,” he said. “They are so overly aggressive compared to any other law enforcement group in the nation.”

He said enforcement operations like the one in Minneapolis “will continue in other places if the current leadership continues and if they are not fully retrained.”

Beshear said the country needs comprehensive immigration reform that addresses long-term undocumented immigrants in the country and also provides a steady workforce. 

“I think that there is a reasonable way to go forward on immigration,” he said. 

RFK as campaign model

Another audience member asked Beshear if a potential 2028 Democratic presidential run would resemble Robert F. Kennedy’s 1968 campaign style that aimed to unite the country deeply divided in the midst of the Vietnam War, massive poverty and the Civil Rights Movement. Kennedy was a top candidate for the Democratic nomination before his June 1968 assassination.

Beshear said he would.

“Absolutely,” he said. “When I think about his campaign … you think about hope, you think about connection. He made you feel that progress was possible, that we could go up against huge adversaries like poverty and we could do better.”

“I’m very angry at what happened today — very angry,” Rep. Patrick Snyder (R-Weston) said. “I talked to my Democratic colleagues and told them that I was close, that it was going to get done, but then they throw this crap at us today. It almost blew it up.” (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Eight Republican state Assembly lawmakers announced at 9:45 p.m. Wednesday that gridlock is ending on bills to provide a year of Medicaid coverage to postpartum mothers and ensure cancer screenings for women with a high risk of breast cancer, and both will receive a vote in the Assembly this week. 

The bills had been held up this legislative session despite widespread bipartisan support due to opposition from Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester), who once said he didn’t want to expand “welfare” in relation to the postpartum coverage and said recent federal changes made changes on breast cancer screening coverage unnecessary. He declined to comment to the Wisconsin Examiner on what changed his mind. 

Vos was not at the press conference led by Rep. Todd Novak (R-Dodgeville) and seven other Assembly Republicans, who represent purple districts across the state and had been advocating for the bills.

“It hasn’t been fun,” Novak said about the process. “I truly appreciate a caucus who is willing to listen to us bring the stories from our district… and get them to a point where they are willing to take a vote tomorrow.”

The lawmakers said that they sent a letter to Vos on Feb. 3 urging him to allow for a vote on the bill. The letter stated that the measure aligns with “core Republican priorities” including “protecting life and supporting families,” “fiscal responsibility” and “reducing government dependency.”

SB 23 would extend Medicaid coverage for postpartum mothers to a year. Wisconsin is one of two states in the U.S. that has not taken the federal extension, which was first offered to states five years ago in the American Rescue Plan Act.

People in Wisconsin are typically only eligible for Medicaid coverage if they make up to 100% of the federal poverty level, but pregnant women can receive Medicaid coverage if they have an annual income of up to 306% of the federal poverty level. Currently in Wisconsin, a newborn whose mother is a Medicaid recipient receives a year of coverage, but mothers risk losing their coverage after 60 days if they don’t otherwise qualify for Medicaid.

The bill passed the Senate in April 2025 on a 32-1 vote. It also previously passed the Senate in 2023-24 legislative session, but died in the Assembly.

SB 264 would require health insurance policies to provide coverage for diagnostic breast examinations and for supplemental breast screening examinations for an individual who has dense breast tissue. The bill would require coverage to include no patient cost-sharing. 

The bill is named “Gail’s Law” in honor of Gail Zeemer, a Neenah woman who advocated for the legislation and who died from breast cancer in 2024. Women with dense breast tissue have a higher risk of breast cancer and dense breast tissue can make it harder for radiologists to see cancer on mammograms, according to the American Cancer Society. 

The bill received a nearly unanimous vote in the Senate in October.

Republican lawmakers also railed at Democratic lawmakers, who had been urging the Assembly to vote on the bills for months and planned to hold up votes during Wednesday’s floor session by introducing amendments on every bill to advocate action on the issues.

“I’m very angry at what happened today — very angry,” Rep. Patrick Snyder (R-Weston) said, adding that he had been speaking to his Republican colleagues about why it was important to join the majority of the country in extending coverage. “I talked to my Democratic colleagues and told them that I was close, that it was going to get done, but then they throw this crap at us today. It almost blew it up.”

At a press conference at 1 p.m., Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) announced that she and her husband are expecting their first child this summer while urging the Assembly to take a vote on the bills that would increase health care coverage for women.

“I wasn’t really planning to talk about this today, but I am pregnant,” Neubauer said, adding that she is due in June. “We could not be more excited. During this pregnancy, I have been reflecting and I’m very lucky. I’m lucky to have quality, affordable health care coverage for myself and my baby when they arrive. For too many Wisconsin families, that health care coverage is cut off far too soon… This needs to end. We must pass postpartum Medicaid expansion now.” 

As the Assembly began acting on bills in the floor session that followed, Democrats took turns interrupting with speeches demanding that GOP lawmakers take up their amendments to put the Medicaid and breast cancer bills on the floor. Shortly after 3 p.m. Rep. Dean Kaufert (R-Neenah) called for a partisan caucus, and the session was paused. The Assembly did not return to the floor until 10 p.m. 

Republican lawmakers said they spent the time in caucus talking about the issues.

“I’m in it for the women that need this protection. They’re in it for politics, and that’s sickening,” Snyder said, adding that it would be hard for him to trust his Democratic colleagues in the future. “I don’t know what they were trying to do, but lobbyists told them to wait at least till Thursday, and they didn’t.”

Novak said his voice was hoarse after the caucus. He said lawmakers who were on the fence about the bill were angered by the Democratic amendments and it set back their progress on the discussions.

“I actually put my seat on the line. I said I wanted this bill to pass or I don’t know I could run again,” Snyder said. “How many Democrats put their seat on the line for anything if there’s something they’re passionate about? That’s why it’s about people, not about the politics.” 

At a press conference after, Neubauer was unapologetic for the Democratic lawmakers’ actions. 

“It seems that the bills are going to the floor after years of Rep. Pat Snyder telling us that these bills were going to be passed and them not being passed, so it does seem like our actions made a difference today,” Neubauer said. 

Neubauer rejected the assertion that Democrats were just engaging in politics and said the job of the minority party is to ensure that important issues get air time and get votes.

“Republicans refusing to vote on [the amendments] is their own choice. We have a responsibility to our constituents and the women of this state whose lives depend on these policies being passed,” Neubauer said. “We were going to stop at nothing to get a vote on these bills. We hope that that’s what’s going to happen tomorrow.”

Rep. Shannon Zimmerman (R-River Falls) said that the development is “proof that minds can be shifted.”

“I appreciate, certainly, the speaker’s willingness to hear us out. I appreciate all of my members in my caucus,” Zimmerman said. “The outcome that we have reached today is one that will have a positive impact on the lives of many in the state of Wisconsin.”

Vos and Assembly Majority Leader Tyler August (R-Walworth) were not at the caucus the entire time. In the early evening, the caucus leaders were at what Vos called a “thank you reception” hosted by the Jobs First Coalition — a nonprofit advocacy group that has a history of spending to help elect Republicans. 

Michelle Litjens, Vos’ wife and a former Republican member of the Assembly, has worked as a fundraiser for the organization. She told reporters the group was thanking legislators and that they often bring guests to speak on issues to their members.

When asked about why they were at the event while lawmakers were said to be in recess for caucus, Vos said “people are caucusing.” 

“This is the way it was for, like, 50 years before I became speaker,” Vos said. He added that people would leave floor sessions to go to receptions “all the time.” 

The Republican lawmakers who announced the deal to bring the bills to the floor said they were able to “win over hearts” in their caucus and shared personal stories about breast cancer. 

“Probably every person in this room has been touched in some way with someone in their family with cancer,” Kaufert said. “In my particular case, my mother when I was 17 years old in high school, she had breast cancer, and they didn’t have technologies that they do now, and at age of 19, my mother passed away due to that breast cancer.”

Rep. Bob Donovan (R-Greenfield) said his wife was diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer.

“Sadly, had this bill been in place back then, it may have impacted her particular situation. I’m very proud of the way she has dealt with this in front of my family and how they’ve stepped up to the plate to deal with it,” Donovan said. “Our situation is what it is, but I can’t tell you how pleased I am to have played a small part in helping this bill move forward.” 

Novak also said Vos is a “tough negotiator,” but that he “really felt what we were saying,” and that other GOP lawmakers also had some concerns.

The reversal comes as Assembly lawmakers are racing to finish their work. August said the Assembly GOP leaders plan to be finished this week. The Assembly has scheduled a floor session for Thursday. 

The lawmakers said they want the bills to go to Gov. Tony Evers by Monday, adding that Evers has committed to signing them without any line-item vetoes as long as they are unchanged.

“They’ll be clean,” Novak said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Senate Republicans and Democrats agreed that they shouldn’t just hand state funds over to the organization for the long term. Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu criticized WisconsinEye at a press conference earlier this month. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

The Wisconsin Senate passed a bill Wednesday to solicit proposals from organizations seeking to run the state’s public affairs network, which livestreams and archives state government proceedings. 

The job since 2007 has been done by WisconsinEye, a nonprofit organization, but Senate lawmakers want to explore other options after the group abruptly stopped its coverage for over a month due to fundraising difficulties and started seeking more substantial state support for its operations. 

The state Assembly has proposed that the state place $10 million, which was already set aside in the state budget for WisconsinEye, into an endowment fund and allow WisconsinEye to use the interest to help support its operations. The organization’s current annual operating budget is nearly $1 million, and even with the interest, WisconsinEye would likely still need to fundraise hundreds of thousands each year.

Senate Republicans and Democrats agreed that they shouldn’t just hand state funds over to the organization for the long term, expressing concerns about WisconsinEye’s management and transparency. 

The Senate bill, approved on a voice vote, would provide a year of short-term funding and initiate a process to solicit bids for the job. The lawmakers said their proposal would allow them to explore all of their options to continue to livestream government proceedings.

Sen. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit) called it a “travesty” that WisconsinEye went dark for over a month earlier this year. He noted that for that time WisconsinEye was in breach of its contract with the Legislature. He said the Senate bill would allow lawmakers to explore all options, noting that he had initially proposed that the state take over the work of livestreaming by creating a state public affairs network. 

“This is a bipartisan bright spot where we actually came together and had conversation with many,” Spreitzer said. 

Specifically, the Senate proposal asks the Department of Administration (DOA) to solicit bids for the operation of a statewide public affairs network that would provide unedited live video and audio coverage of state government proceedings. Those proceedings would include Senate and Assembly floor sessions, legislative committee meetings, state agency meetings, state Supreme Court and other judicial meetings. The bill states that if “practicable,” the network can also cover eligible news conferences and civic events. 

An amendment to the bill implements a deadline for submitting proposals of June 30, 2026. The Department of Administration will then need to submit each proposal to the Legislature and may include its own recommendations. 

The amendment also includes a provision to have WisconsinEye and the DOA secretary submit a request for temporary funding to the Joint Committee on Finance. The grant for temporary funding would be $585,630.60 and if approved by JFC would be paid out to WisconsinEye in monthly payments of $48,802.55.

The payments would cease if WisconsinEye stops providing live coverage and online access to its archives or if another organization is selected during the proposals process to take over as the state’s public affairs network.

The amendment also includes a provision, originally included in the Assembly proposal, requiring WisconsinEye to appoint new members to its board of directors including one designee each for the Assembly speaker, Assembly minority leader, Senate majority leader and Senate minority leader. 

Sen. Julian Bradley (R-New Berlin), the lead author on the bill, said he hoped the Assembly would take up the proposal. 

“Transparency is the most important thing,” Bradley said, adding that it is “awesome that we were able to get this done.”

Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein (D-Middleton) noted that she had concerns leaving conversations with her fellow caucus leaders about the proposal.

“It was clear walking out of that meeting that we weren’t on the same page as the state Assembly,” Hesselbein said.

WisconsinEye restarted its coverage this month after the Joint Committee on Legislative Organization voted to provide $50,000 to the nonprofit to cover its month of expenses. 

The Assembly proposal, which was announced in a joint press conference with Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) and Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine), passed in a 96-0 vote. 

“Donors view this approach with confidence, knowing that while WisconsinEye must continue to raise private dollars, that requirement becomes an achievable goal to meet because it is coupled with a solid state commitment of financial partnership,” WisconsinEye said in a statement.

WisconsinEye said in an update this week that without an additional infusion of $50,000 in state funds for the month of March that it won’t be able to continue its coverage throughout the remainder of the legislative session. The state Assembly plans to wrap its work up this month, but the Senate plans to continue its work next month. 

The organization said it would also be “happy” to submit a proposal to the DOA should that be the path that lawmakers choose. But the statement said a request for proposal would take “considerable time” and there is “also the question from what appropriation an eventual contract might be funded.” 

“Further, WisconsinEye has funding to carry operations through February. An outstanding question is whether WisconsinEye would be in a position to maintain operations for any time period through which an RFP process might require,” WisconsinEye stated. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Members of the WEBB gather at Walnut Way with Lindsay Heights residents on Feb. 10 to publicly demand that the state's utility regulators not allow We Energies to charge residential customers for the explosive, unprecedented growth in electricity demand to power hyperscale data centers. (Photo courtesy Walnut Way Conservation Corps.)

Data centers, artificial intelligence and fossil fuels are dominating headlines. Across the  United States, more than $350 billion was invested in AI and data-center infrastructure, with  tens of billions of dollars proposed in Wisconsin. Investment and economic development are  often framed as unequivocal wins, but energy infrastructure is different. If built without  foresight, the consequences will reshape the future. 

Growth is certain; however the balance between positive and negative growth is yet to be  determined. 

I have worked in Wisconsin’s energy sector since 2019, beginning in residential and  commercial solar. Over the years, I’ve seen energy debates around renewable energy become  increasingly politicized, even as their original purpose remains unchanged: to produce reliable  electricity, reduce dependence on fragile infrastructure, and give communities more control  over their energy supply. Yet, the existing industry stakeholders have blocked deployment and  ownership for everyone but themselves. While homeowners, farmers, tribal nations and  small businesses face mounting restrictions on deploying their own power systems, the state  has moved quickly to approve massive new energy loads for data centers. These agreements  are also accompanied by preferential rate structures, infrastructure guarantees and the ability  to negotiate. 

That contradiction should concern all of us. 

Wisconsin residents have grown accustomed to electric rate increases justified by grid  maintenance, system upgrades and long-term reliability. According to federal energy data,  Wisconsin already ranks among the top 15 states for electricity costs, and utilities have  signaled additional increases in the years ahead. At the same time, power reliability has  deteriorated in both rural and urban areas. 

In parts of Milwaukee, aging poles lean precariously, and low-hanging lines form tangled  webs that look untouched for decades. In rural Wisconsin, the impacts are similar. Tribal  nations such as the Sokaogon Chippewa and the Menominee Nation have experienced  long-duration outages lasting days or even weeks, disrupting health care, food systems and  economic activity. These are not isolated incidents; they are symptoms of an overstretched  and unevenly maintained grid. 

Against this backdrop, Wisconsin is welcoming some of the most energy-intensive facilities  on the planet. A single large data center can consume as much electricity as a small city,  operating around the clock, every day of the year. The rise of AI only accelerates this demand.  Unlike the rest of the state, these facilities do not proceed without firm assurances of power  availability, reliability, transmission access,and cost certainty. 

Data centers operate under a different set of rules.  

Utilities and regulators are willing to negotiate specialized rate structures, accelerate  infrastructure investments, and prioritize reliability. Meanwhile, everyday ratepayers, who  collectively use far less power and have far less leverage, are asked to shoulder rising costs  and accept declining service quality.  

This is not a free market. Wisconsin’s energy industry has become an unregulated monopoly.  Large utilities control generation, transmission and distribution, and they largely determine  who is allowed to produce power and under what terms. While utilities have invested heavily  in renewable energy they own, they continue to restrict external ownership and  community-scale generation knowing that distributed energy can reduce peak demand,  improve resilience, and lower long-term system costs.  

If utilities can justify new power plants, substations and transmission lines for data centers,  they must also explain why a similar urgency does not apply to grid reliability, ownership  opportunities for distributed energy systems and lower rates for Wisconsin residents. Why is  Wisconsin able to deliver gigawatts of electricity to data centers, yet unable to address  persistent grid failures in communities that have been struggling for decades?  

This moment calls for accountability, not ideology. Wisconsin deserves transparency in how  data center energy deals are structured, who bears the costs of new infrastructure and how  reliability risks are distributed. Ratepayers deserve to know why the largest electricity users  receive the greatest assurances, while households, businesses and communities are told to  accept less while paying more. Economic growth should not come at the expense of affordability,  resilience or fairness. If Wisconsin is going to power the future of AI and digital  infrastructure, it must also protect the people and communities that power Wisconsin itself.  

This energy crisis is not inevitable. It is the result of choices. And those choices will  determine whether Wisconsin’s energy future delivers reliable power for all, or a system  defined by higher costs, more frequent outages and growing divides between communities. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Colorado Republican state Sen. Rod Pelton, left, and Senate President James Coleman, a Democrat, speak during the sixth day of the special legislative session in August 2025. Colorado is among the states using state funds to help residents buy health coverage on Obamacare exchanges. (Photo by Delilah Brumer/Colorado Newsline)

Ten Democratic-leaning states are using their own money to help people buy Obamacare health plans, at least partially replacing the federal tax credits that expired at the end of last year.

The state assistance, some of it offered through programs that existed before the federal subsidies expired, is helping hundreds of thousands of people lower their monthly premium payments, which otherwise would have surged to double or even triple what they were before the expiration of the federal aid. The savings can total hundreds of dollars per month.

But only New Mexico is completely filling the gap left by the expiration of the federal help by offering it to people of all incomes; for most Americans buying Obamacare plans, the end of the federal aid means much higher prices. And New Mexico and the other states that are trying to cushion the blow for their residents will face increasing budget pressures as health care costs continue their inexorable rise.

In addition to the expiration of the federal subsidies, the cost of Obamacare coverage has increased because of other factors, including labor shortages and the rising cost of prescription drugs, driven in part by the growing demand for GLP-1 drugs such as Ozempic and Wegovy.

The enhanced federal subsidies were made available by the American Rescue Plan Act in 2021 and later extended through the end of 2025 by the Inflation Reduction Act. Designed as a temporary pandemic-era measure, they helped boost the number of people buying health coverage from the insurance marketplaces created under the Affordable Care Act — Obamacare’s formal name — from 11.4 million people in 2020 to 24.3 million last year.

The enhanced subsidies were available to everyone, regardless of income. Additional federal aid provided to some of the lowest-income households entirely eliminated premium payments for some people.

Congressional leaders let the subsidies expire on Dec. 31. As of the end of last month, the number of people enrolled in marketplace coverage was down by about 1.2 million compared with last year, according to federal data.

Last year, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the expiration of the federal subsidies would increase the number of people without insurance by 4.2 million by 2034.

Under the Affordable Care Act, each state can either use the federal government’s online insurance marketplace, HealthCare.gov, or operate its own state-run exchange. Only the 21 states plus the District of Columbia with state-run marketplaces can offer state-funded tax credits or subsidies, and at least 10 of them (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Vermont and Washington) are doing so.

Matt McGough, a policy analyst at health care research group KFF, said many of the people who buy Obamacare plans “have fallen between the cracks of the health care system.”

“They might not work a job or work enough hours at a job to be eligible for health benefits. They are too young for Medicare. They make too much to be eligible for Medicaid, and they really have no other option but to go to the marketplace,” McGough said.

He warned that relatively healthy people are the ones most likely to forgo marketplace coverage rather than pay more for it. That will leave the exchanges with the people who have the greatest health needs, raising costs and premiums for everyone. To avoid that scenario, he said, states “want to be able to keep as many people in the marketplace as possible.”

A big commitment in New Mexico

In New Mexico, Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham and state lawmakers earlier this year tapped the state’s 5-year-old Health Care Affordability Fund for an additional $17.3 million so they could entirely replace the expired federal subsidies through June 30 for all enrollees, regardless of income.

The vast majority of the 82,400 New Mexicans who buy coverage from the state marketplace are eligible for state help. Perhaps as a result, New Mexico is one of only a handful of states where the number of people buying Obamacare plans has increased this year: Enrollment is up 18% in New Mexico, while there have been single-digit increases in the District of Columbia, Maryland and Texas.

“We feel really great about having come together to really focus on these affordability challenges for New Mexicans, and really proud of the gains that we’ve made in coverage while we’re seeing losses elsewhere,” said Kari Armijo, cabinet secretary for the New Mexico Health Care Authority. She noted that a handful of Republican state lawmakers have joined Democrats in supporting the aid.

The money in New Mexico’s Health Care Affordability Fund comes from a 3.75% surtax levied on insurance companies. When the fund was created, the surtax was expected to generate about $165 million in new revenue annually.

Currently, the state uses nearly half of the revenue from the surtax to fund other parts of its budget. But the New Mexico House earlier this month approved a bill that would gradually increase the portion of the surtax allocated to the Health Care Affordability Fund, from the current 55% to 100% in 2028.

Legislative financial analysts recently questioned the long-term sustainability of that approach. Armijo acknowledged that continuing to replace the expired federal subsidies “will deplete the fund over time.”

“It is a pretty substantial amount of money, and it is going to strain the programs that we can provide with that funding,” Armijo said.

Paul Gessing, president of the Rio Grande Foundation, a conservative-leaning think tank in New Mexico, said the state is “flush with oil and gas money” now, enabling it to “spend money in ways that don’t make a great deal of sense for the population as a whole and instead benefits a small sliver of relatively well-off New Mexicans.”

Gessing said the state should focus on reducing health care spending by recruiting and retaining more doctors and nurses to lessen its shortage of providers and by overhauling medical malpractice laws.

“I don’t think the state should make it a practice to use state funds to fill in the gap when federal funding is shifted or eliminated,” Gessing said.

Other states

In California, where 1.9 million people were enrolled on the state’s exchange in 2025, enrollment is already down by 32% from last year, according to state figures.

The state has opted this year to spend $190 million to fully replace the lost federal subsidies for people earning up to 150% of the federal poverty level ($23,940 for an individual), and partially replace them for people making between 150% and 165% of the federal poverty level — just above eligibility for Medicaid in the state. About 390,000 enrollees are receiving the state-based subsidies this year.

Like New Mexico, California in 2021 created a Health Care Affordability Reserve Fund, funded through general revenue and penalties some people have to pay when they file their taxes.

The state budget Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed last month envisions a “modest projected deficit” of $2.9 billion for fiscal year 2026-2027, but that could grow to $22 billion the next year. California has a total annual budget of about $350 billion.

“Any amount of money that you can put into affordability is meaningful,” said Jessica Altman, executive director of California’s marketplace. “Thinking about those trade-offs is a challenging conversation, but an important one at the state level.”

In Colorado, the state is offering financial help through a new program called the Colorado Premium Assistance program. It came together during an August 2025 special session, when Colorado lawmakers approved up to $110 million this year to partially replace the federal subsidies. Help will be available to anyone making between 133% and 400% of the federal poverty level, or between $43,890 and $132,000 for a family of four.

“It is clear that this is a value for Coloradans. And having a state based marketplace like we do in Colorado, it really allows us to develop state-specific solutions and have our policies and changes driven by the needs of the people who live here,” said Nina Schwartz, chief policy and external affairs officer for Colorado’s marketplace.

Schwartz emphasized, however, that the state help won’t entirely replace the expired federal aid, and that as a result, the number of people buying coverage on the exchange is declining. Cancellations are up 83% compared with last year.

“We’re seeing an increase in the number of cancellations, with the number of people nearly doubling who canceled their plans during open enrollment compared to last year,” she said.

Other states also are opting for limited assistance. Connecticut, for example, is offering aid to households with incomes up to 200% of the federal poverty level, and the state announced it would spend $115 million in 2026 to partially offset the expiration of the federal subsidies.

Massachusetts has set aside $250 million to enhance its existing state subsidy program, helping to keep around 270,000 enrollees with incomes below 400% of the federal poverty level enrolled with stable premiums. As of early January, around 25,000 people in Massachusetts had already canceled their marketplace plans.

Maryland has a new premium assistance program that fully replaces the federal aid for enrollees earning below 200% of the federal poverty level and partly replaces it for those earning between 200% and 400% of the federal poverty level. Since last year, New York has offered help to marketplace enrollees with incomes up to 400% of the federal poverty level. And since 2023, Washington has offered state subsidies to anyone earning below 250% of the federal poverty level.

Stateline reporter Shalina Chatlani can be reached at schatlani@stateline.org. 

An oak savannah in southern Dane County that the Badgerland Foundation is working to conserve using Knowles-Nelson Stewardship funds (Photo by Henry Redman/Wisconsin Examiner)

The broadly popular Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Grant program is on life support after Wisconsin Senate Republicans canceled a vote on a GOP-authored bill to extend the program during the body’s floor session Wednesday. 

For nearly four decades, the program has allowed the state Department of Natural Resources to support the acquisition of land for conservation purposes. The program is set to expire June 30 when its funding runs out. 

Lawmakers have been working for nearly a year to reach an agreement on an extension. A Knowles-Nelson extension in Gov. Tony Evers’ proposed budget last year was stripped out by Republicans and a Democratic-authored bill supported by all 60 legislative Democrats has languished in a Republican-controlled committee. 

In recent years, a handful of legislative Republicans have become increasingly hostile to the stewardship program, complaining that it has taken too much land off local property tax rolls in the northern part of the state and that a state Supreme Court decision last year removed the Legislature’s oversight authority over the program’s spending. 

In January, Assembly Republicans passed a bill that would extend the program without any funding for land acquisition. With the Assembly holding its final scheduled floor session of the year on Thursday, the Senate’s failure to hold a vote on its version of the bill Wednesday means it’s unlikely a bill will make it to Evers’ desk. 

Democrats have said they won’t support a version of the bill that ends land acquisition under the program. 

In recent weeks, Republicans have begun to lay the groundwork for claiming that any failure to extend the program would be the Democrats’ fault. 

But Sen. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point), the author of the Republican proposal, said Wednesday after the bill was dropped from the schedule that the Senate needs to pass a version of the bill with 17 Republican votes.  With supporters and opponents of the program divided within the Republican caucus, advocates for the program have said for months it’s been clear that any version of stewardship extension would require bipartisan support. 

“This has been one of these bills that’s been very difficult to thread the needle on,” Testin said after the Wednesday floor session. “So it’s been sort of a tug of war, you do X, Y, and Z on one provision of the bill. You have members that raise concerns, and if you do X, Y and Z a different way, they’ve got concerns as well.”

Sen. Jodi Habush Sinykin (D-Whitefish Bay), who wrote the Democratic proposal and has been involved in legislative negotiations over the program, said it’s disingenuous for Republicans to point fingers at Democrats, when Democrats are united in their support for the program and have tried to compromise. 

The initial bill proposed by Habush Sinykin included a provision to provide independent oversight of the program as a response to Republican concerns and in recent days offered a compromise of extending the program with $5-6 million in land acquisition funding — about $10 million less than budgeted currently. On the floor on Wednesday, Democrats attempted to force a vote on a motion that would have extended the program for one year at current funding levels. 

“Their efforts to try to cast blame or aspersions on the Democrats when it is apparent that they have too many members of their caucus who are strongly opposed to this program … they have not been shy or reticent about voicing publicly strong opposition to the continuity of this program,” Habush Sinykin said. “So it takes not just a lot of nerve, but a questionable honesty, to try to pin this on Democrats.” 

Habush Sinykin said the Assembly version of the bill was “not even tempting” because it doesn’t include any land acquisition funds. 

“What they are looking for and needing are more Democratic votes, which is a big responsibility, because we care about the integrity of the program,” she said. “So you don’t want to give votes for something that doesn’t have value and isn’t true to the purpose.”

“Everyone in the building knows, and many outside the building know, that Republicans don’t like Knowles-Nelson,” she continued, “that they can’t get it done in their caucus.”

Baylor Spears contributed reporting to this story.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Marathon Petroleum Company’s Salt Lake City Refinery in Salt Lake City on Jan. 3, 2024. (Photo by Spenser Heaps for Utah News Dispatch)

A coalition of public health and environmental groups filed a suit Wednesday challenging the Trump administration’s recent finding that the Environmental Protection Agency could not regulate climate-warming greenhouse gases.

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and President Donald Trump announced last week the administration was finalizing a repeal of the 2009 endangerment finding, which declared the agency could regulate greenhouse gas emissions, particularly from vehicle emissions, because climate change posed a danger to human health.

The 17 groups who jointly filed the suit Wednesday include the American Public Health Association, Clean Wisconsin, Union of Concerned Scientists, Earthjustice and Natural Resources Defense Council. 

‘Required by law to protect us’

Their two-page filing in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit does not detail any of the groups’ legal arguments against the repeal, but lawyers and officials for the groups said the EPA was legally bound, under the Clean Air Act, to protect people from greenhouse gas emissions. 

“They are required by law to protect us from air pollution that endangers public health and welfare,” Dr. Georges C. Benjamin, the CEO of the American Public Health Association, said on a video call with reporters. “And that includes greenhouse gases that are driving climate change.”

The law requires challenges to new nationwide agency actions on emissions to be filed in the D.C. Circuit.

In an email, EPA press secretary Brigit Hirsch said the agency had reviewed the endangerment finding, the Clean Air Act and related court decisions, including “robust analysis” of recent Supreme Court decisions. The agency concluded it did not have authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

“Unlike our predecessors, the Trump EPA is committed to following the law exactly as it is written and as Congress intended—not as others might wish it to be,” Hirsch said. 

“In the absence of such authority, the Endangerment Finding is not valid, and EPA cannot retain the regulations that resulted from it,” she continued. “EPA is bound by the laws established by Congress, including under the CAA. Congress never intended to give EPA authority to impose GHG regulations for cars and trucks.”

Emissions are pollutants, opponents say

But the groups said the EPA’s reasoning ignored that the agency has long regulated emissions as part of its mandate to protect clear air. The omission of the term “greenhouse gases” in the Clean Air Act is “a manufactured problem” by opponents of regulation, Hana Vizcarra, a senior attorney at Earthjustice, said.

“The Clean Air Act was intended to cover air pollutants, full stop. Air pollutants include greenhouse gases,” she said. “This argument that Congress needs to do something different to be able to regulate greenhouse gases… it’s just a way to avoid the issue and avoid regulation.”

The matter is “settled law,” the groups said, as federal courts have affirmed and reaffirmed the EPA’s power to regulate emissions.

A 2007 U.S. Supreme Court case established that the Clean Air Act “was unambiguous” in authorizing the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases as pollutants, Meredith Hankins, a senior attorney at NRDC, said. 

That decision led to the EPA’s so-called endangerment finding two years later, during President Barack Obama’s first year in office.

Attorneys general likely to weigh in

Wednesday’s challenge will likely be consolidated with other challenges, including those from “blue-state attorneys general,” Hankins said.

In the announcement last week, Trump said the endangerment finding, and the tailpipe emissions standards that relied on it, had dragged down the automotive sector and the broader economy nationwide.

The administration has said the move will save Americans more than $1 trillion by reducing regulations.

The repeal’s opponents, though, said Wednesday that projection ignored more than $100 billion in additional costs American drivers would see if fuel efficiency standards are relaxed or the enormous public health costs from worsened air quality and increased climate risks.

Gov. Tony Evers called on lawmakers to keep working this year in his final State of the State address. (Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner)

Gov. Tony Evers urged Wisconsin lawmakers to work through the rest of this year during his final State of the State address Tuesday evening — rejecting a Republican tax cut and school funding proposal and calling for lawmakers to invest in schools. 

Evers, who decided not to run for a third term in office, told lawmakers that the people of Wisconsin are expecting them to get more done this year. The Assembly plans on wrapping up its work for the session by the end of the week. The state Senate plans to work into March, but with the Assembly’s self-imposed deadline, this month is the last chance to pass bills that could get to Evers’ desk before the next legislative session.

“I know many lawmakers are antsy to end the legislative session and pack up to get back on the campaign trail — by the way, if anyone running wants advice from someone who’s won five statewide elections, let me know,” Evers said. “I know many of you are up for election, but here’s the deal: after years of delivering historic, bipartisan wins for our state, Wisconsinites have high expectations for the work we can do together over the next 10 months.” 

Wisconsin’s upcoming 2026 November elections will produce a new governor and could lead to new leadership in the state Assembly and Senate where the balance of power is at stake.

Republican lawmakers were not enthralled by Evers’ address, shaking their heads when they disagreed, making side comments to their fellow lawmakers and pulling their phones out during portions of the address. Democratic lawmakers stood to applaud throughout the address with some Republican lawmakers joining the applause at times while remaining seated. 

Evers touted a number of his accomplishments in the more than 800 bills he has signed throughout his last seven years in office. He noted that 97% of those bills were bipartisan. 

Some of the accomplishments he highlighted included $2 billion in tax cuts, securing $360 million to support child care in the state improving and repairing over 9,600 miles of roads and over 2,400 bridges across Wisconsin, bolstering support for public defenders and district attorneys and passing a law to ensure education about Hmong and Asian American history in school. 

Evers added that he is not done yet.

At the top of Evers’ to-do list for his final year in office is getting a deal to reduce property taxes and provide schools with additional funding.

Over the last couple of weeks, Evers has been negotiating with lawmakers on how to use the state’s projected $2.5 billion budget surplus.

“I’m hopeful we can continue building upon those efforts this session, including reaching bipartisan agreement on a plan to get meaningful resources to K-12 schools and provide property tax relief, and it must balance these important obligations a heck of a lot better than the plan Republican leaders sent me this week,” Evers said. 

The most recent proposal put together by Republican leaders and delivered to Evers on Sunday included funding for special education and the school levy tax credit to reduce property taxes for local communities. It did not include funding for general school aid.

In the recent state budget, Republican lawmakers did not provide additional state funding to general school aid in part because of their frustration with Evers’ 400-year veto, which extended an annual $325 per pupil school revenue limit increase well beyond the last budget cycle. Without state funding, schools in Wisconsin can only use the authority Evers gave them to increase property taxes. 

“I get Republicans want to blame my 400-year veto for property taxes going up. Why? Politics, of course. Republicans running under fair maps need someone else to blame for failing to fund our schools at the levels I’ve asked them to for about two decades of my life,” Evers said. “Here’s the truth: funding our schools is a responsibility that the state and local partners share. Local property taxes go up when the state fails to do its part to meet its obligation.” 

Evers also noted that his 400-year veto is not an automatic property tax increase, but rather schools opt into exercising the additional authority and if there was additional state aid, then districts would not raise property taxes.

“The Legislature has rejected over $7 billion for K-12 schools that I requested over the last four state budgets,” he said. “If lawmakers want to have an honest conversation about property taxes, start there.”

“We have a constitutional obligation to fund our schools in this state,” Evers said. “The Legislature must approve the level of funding necessary to meet the percentages our kids and our schools were promised in the last budget. We can’t afford for lawmakers to lose focus on the future we’ve been working hard to build together just because it’s an election year. I know the Legislature would rather hit the road and take the rest of the year off, but I’m going to ask lawmakers to stick around until our work here is finished.” 

GOP leader wants sit down negotiations

After Evers’ address, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) told reporters that Evers was taking credit for bipartisan work that was only possible because of the Republican-led Legislature. 

Ahead of the address, Vos made similar comments to reporters, saying that “every success that Gov. Evers has had on policy has only been because the Legislature worked with him on the vast majority of those things to get them done.” Evers’ two terms in office have been marked by an often contentious relationship with Republicans, who have held the majority in the state Senate and Assembly during his entire tenure. Still, lawmakers and Evers have been able to pass four state budgets and get various bipartisan bills signed into law.

Vos said lawmakers had received a reply from Evers to their property tax  proposal that evening. 

“It sounds like he is willing to draw bright lines in the sand. That is not something I’ve ever found to be productive. You need to be able to sit down and talk about things that are important to both the Legislature, the taxpayers and the governor,” Vos said. “It should not be a ‘my way or the highway’ type negotiation.”

Vos said he was disappointed that Evers hadn’t reached out to speak with lawmakers on Monday or Tuesday, but is optimistic that lawmakers can speak with Evers Wednesday.

“It seems to me we tried very hard to reach in the middle. Now, it’s the governor’s job after a pretty partisan speech to actually figure out how he’s going to get to the middle like we did,” Vos said. 

Vos claimed the GOP plan invests more money into public education than Evers proposed. The GOP plan includes $500 million for property tax relief through the school levy tax credit and $200 million for special education reimbursement. It does not include any money for general school aids.

Evers’ proposal included $200 million for special education funding, $450 million for general school aids to buy out the projected statewide school property tax levy and in exchange, he proposed that Republicans would get $550 million towards the school levy tax credit.

Asked to clarify, Vos said Republicans had not asked for the $550 million for the school levy tax credit.

“We didn’t ask for that. It’s like me saying, you want money for child care? Well, that’s not even part of the discussion,” Vos said.

Democratic lawmakers also called on the Legislature to keep working this year. 

Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) criticized Republican lawmakers at a press conference Tuesday morning for planning to “gavel out of session for the next 10 months” at the end of this week, saying they were giving “themselves a vacation while folks in our districts are left wondering how they are going to make ends meet.” She said Evers and Democrats were planning to continue working hard to deliver for the people of Wisconsin.

Other issues on Evers’ to-do list

Evers also laid out several other issues areas he wants addressed in his final year. 

Evers urged lawmakers to send him bills that would codify the Office of Violence Prevention into state law and provide $66 million for the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) programs. 

“Do the right thing and get this done,” Evers said. 

He also announced that the state has plans to partner with the Milwaukee Bucks, the state’s professional basketball team, on a campaign to combat domestic violence. 

Evers also noted his previous attempts to advance gun control measures but didn’t urge Republican lawmakers to do anything this year. 

“There’s no issue Republicans have done less about than guns,” he said. “This much is clear: If Wisconsinites want to get something — anything — done about gun violence, we must elect legislators who will do a damn thing to change it.” 

Evers said that he is also hoping that lawmakers will work to pass a bill to close the Green Bay Correctional Institution. 

“It’s been over a year now, and Republicans have neither enacted my plan nor proposed a plan of their own,” Evers said. “I’m still hopeful we can work together to pass a bipartisan bill this year on comprehensive corrections reform to set an achievable goal for GBCI to close, convert Lincoln Hills, and revamp Waupun.”

On artificial intelligence and data centers, Evers said Wisconsin must “embrace a future where we don’t have to choose between mitigating climate change and protecting our environment or creating good-paying jobs and having a strong economy.”

Evers also urged lawmakers to pass a bipartisan bill to reauthorize the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship program that “both supports land acquisition and management of Wisconsin’s valuable natural resources and public lands,” as well as a bill combating PFAS so the $125 million that was approved over two years ago can be released to Wisconsinites. 

Federal government concerns

The outgoing governor also spoke to “what worries me about our future and keeps me up at night,” focusing on his concerns about actions by the Trump administration. 

Evers said he is worried about the “reckless decisions being made in Washington,” saying he thinks they “will have disastrous consequences for Wisconsinites, taxpayers and our state budget moving forward.” He said he is also worried about federal workers who have been laid off. 

According to WPR, 2,4000 federal workers in Wisconsin have lost their jobs under the Trump administration. 

“I’m also angry when I think about our neighbors — young kids and families across our state — who aren’t going to school or work or anywhere else, because they’re scared leaving their home may mean their family will be torn apart,” Evers said, referring to fears about aggressive federal immigration enforcement. “I worry about our kids who are being traumatized by violence on social media, in the news, on our streets and in our neighborhoods, and I worry about what all of this means for America’s Dairyland, which has depended on the hard work of immigrants for generations.”

“Wisconsinites are feeling the squeeze due to tariff taxes and erratic trade wars,” Evers continued. “Prices are going up on things like school supplies, groceries, clothes, gas and more.” 

Evers also said he is worried about the effects of the federal tax and spending bill signed by Trump last year. He noted that Wisconsin could face penalties if the state’s payment error rate for the SNAP program doesn’t remain below 6%. 

The Evers administration has estimated that a penalty could cost the state up to $205 million, and that $69 million and 56 additional administrative positions for DHS are needed to ensure that the state’s error rate remains below 6%.

“The sooner the Legislature invests in FoodShare quality control efforts, the more time the state has to keep FoodShare error rates down. It’s pretty simple,” Evers said. “We can save Wisconsin taxpayers potentially hundreds of millions of dollars in penalty fees a year we could have to pay the Trump administration if we don’t. I’m not negotiating with Republicans about a $70 million investment the state must make right now to save Wisconsin taxpayers as much as $200 million in penalty fees later. We’ve been asking for this for months, and it has to get done. If the Legislature fails to provide the funding the state needs, Republicans will be to blame for the penalty fees taxpayers will be forced to pay.”

Evers also announced that he plans to sign an executive order to have Wisconsin join the World Health Organization’s Global Response Network. 

Wants constitutional amendment on nonpartisan redistricting 

Evers said he plans to call a special session in the spring to pass a constitutional amendment banning partisan gerrymandering in Wisconsin. 

Wisconsin’s current legislative maps were adopted by the Republican-led Legislature and Evers after a state Supreme Court decision found that the previous maps were unconstitutional. The maps have made  Wisconsin’s legislative races newly competitive. However, lawmakers did not change the map drawing process. 

“Wisconsin is as purple as ever, but we’ve shown we can put politics aside and work together to get good things done… A big part of that is the fact that, today, lawmakers are elected under the fair maps I signed into law.  But here’s the problem, Wisconsin: New maps are redrawn every 10 years,” Evers said, adding that without a nonpartisan redistricting process there is “no guarantee Wisconsinites will still have fair maps after the next U.S. Census.” 

Evers noted that Republican states, under pressure from the Trump administration, have adopted election maps that seek to further favor Republicans. He said that “as a result, Democratic legislatures have been put in the unthinkable position of having to respond by trying to restore balance to our elections.” 

“Politics could get in the way of creating a nonpartisan redistricting commission that everyone can support, but there’s one thing that we should all be able to agree on, which is that politics should stay out of redistricting from start to finish,” Evers said. 

Constitutional amendments in Wisconsin must pass two consecutive sessions of the Legislature before going to voters for a final vote that decides whether a change is made. They do not require a signature from the governor. 

Vos said he is open to proposals for nonpartisan redistricting, but noted the failure of a previous GOP proposal to implement a nonpartisan redistricting commission.

“Frankly, all the Democrats across the country are rushing the gerrymander. I hope he’s sincere in saying he doesn’t want that, but call me skeptical,” Vos said. 

Evers added that he “won’t hesitate to bring the Legislature into special session later this year in August or September or October.” 

“Heck, I’m old enough to remember when the Legislature was willing to meet in December,” he said. 

“Year of the Neighbor” 

Each year during his State of the State address, Evers has declared an overall theme for the year. For his final year he announced the “Year of the Neighbor.”

“I want us to focus on our Wisconsin values of kindness, respect, empathy, and compassion,” Evers said. “We could all use a good neighbor, and we could all be better neighbors, and we’re going to spend the next year celebrating the neighbors who make Wisconsin the great place it is to call home.” 

Some of the “neighbors” Evers highlighted in his address included “the first responders who answer our call in our darkest hour,” “the librarians who help us find our new favorite book,” “the teachers who comfort, inspire and educate our kids,” “the state worker who helped us find and apply for health care or job training” and the “veteran who served our country.” 

“Wisconsinites are helpers by nature; it’s in our DNA. When things are tough, we roll up our sleeves and get to work. We shovel a driveway or bake a casserole, and we show up for our neighbors,” Evers said. “Whether it’s unpredictable weather or the unpredictable nature of politics, we’re all in this together, and we’re going to get through it together, not by alienating our neighbors, but by getting to know them, by looking out for one another and by maintaining our Wisconsin values of kindness, empathy, compassion and respect.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Sen, Jodi Habush Sinykin, left, and Rep. Angela Stroud, both Democrats, provide testimony Tuesday at a public hearing on their bill to regulate data centers, including on their use of electric power. (Screenshot/WisEye)

Data centers and local communities would be barred from working in secret under legislation that received a public hearing before a state Senate committee Tuesday.

The Senate Committee on Utilities, Technology and Tourism also heard testimony on a pair of competing bills, both pitched as ensuring that data centers pay their own way for the electric power they use and controlling how they use water resources.

SB 969 would impose a blanket ban on non-disclosure agreements between data center companies and the municipalities where they’re planning projects.

“Unfortunately, we have witnessed a troubling pattern in Wisconsin and throughout our country — community leaders are signing secrecy deals with big tech companies and their agents to conceal material facts about the development of billion-dollar data centers from the public,” said Sen. Andre Jacque (R-New Franken), the bill’s author, in his testimony on the measure. “These same entities seek to hide vital information about the scope and impacts of their intended developments from the local officials charged with guarding their citizens’ welfare, undermining sound decision-making and eroding confidence in the process.”

The secrecy surrounding a data center project in Menomonie prompted local opposition that led the community’s city council to pass an ordinance in January stopping a developer from advancing the $1.6 billion project.

“This bill is really about trust,” said state Rep. Clint Moses (R-Menomonie), the author of the bill’s Assembly companion. “It makes sure those conversations happen in the open and not behind closed doors.”

A data center industry lobbyist opposed the measure, asserting that a ban on non-disclosure agreements, or NDAs, could stall Wisconsin’s emergence as a prime data center location.  

Brad Tietz, the state policy director for the Data Center Coalition, said the industry group has been working with its member businesses “on model frameworks that ensure early and proactive community engagement and transparency while safeguarding sensitive proprietary and security information.”

Non-disclosure agreements are especially important in the early stages of data center site selection, “where a company may be considering multiple sites and has not yet made a final decision,” Tietz told lawmakers. “But to simply put a blanket opposition on NDAs would put Wisconsin at a competitive disadvantage right when it is primed to do exceptionally well in this industry.”

Data center utility costs

The bulk of Tuesday’s hearing focused on two other pieces of legislation, one authored by Democrats and the other by Republicans. Both measures were written with the intent of ensuring that power-hungry data center developments don’t pass off their electricity costs to the rest of the public.

SB 729 is authored by Sen. Jodi Habush Sinykin (D-Whitefish Bay) and state Rep. Angela Stroud (D-Ashland). The Assembly companion is AB 722.

“Wisconsin must establish a comprehensive and responsible regulatory framework that protects Wisconsin taxpayers, workers, and our natural resources now and into the future,” Habush Sinykin told the committee. “Yet here’s the rub. Currently, Wisconsin has no statewide regulatory standards governing hyperscale data centers. None.”

Habush Sinykin said that the bill was written in consultation with the state Public Service Commission. It would put data centers in a new class of electric power users, “very large customers,” and require utilities serving those users to file a rate case for that class every two years.

“I believe that we all have a shared goal of ensuring that the public does not pay for the energy expenses of data centers,” Stroud told the committee. “According to the Public Service Commission, establishing a very large customer class tariff is the most effective tool currently available to ensure that energy-related costs are borne by data centers rather than shifted on to the general public.”

Utilities would also be required to report quarterly their data center users’ energy consumption and sources and make that information public.

Because data centers are also heavy uses of water, the bill requires water utilities to notify the PSC of individual customers that use 25% of the utility’s water volume.

The Habush Sinykin/Stroud bill includes provisions to encourage renewable energy use and the use of union labor. In order to qualify for a sales and use tax exemption from the Wisconsin Economic Development Corp., the data center must derive at least 70% of its energy from renewables and pay the construction workers the prevailing wage in the region if they aren’t covered by a union contract.

The committee chair, Sen. Julian Bradley (R-New Berlin), questioned those provisions.

“This bill appears to me as though it’s going to say, ‘Well, you can come here. We understand you bring a massive economic impact, but actually we want more,’” Bradley said. “It’s going to drive them away from the state of Wisconsin and then we’re going to lose out.”

But Stroud said data center developers have been enthusiastic about adopting clean energy.

“We are extending tax credits to the richest companies in the world. It is not a small thing to do that,” Stroud said. “We should be getting a huge benefit. And it would change the conversation, I think, in a lot of these communities if they had access to significant benefits.”

Republicans go in a different direction

The alternative bill — AB 840/SB 843, authored by Rep. Shannon Zimmerman (R-River Falls) and Sen. Romain Quinn (R-Birchwood) — mostly takes different approaches on all of the issues involved. The Assembly version passed that house in January on a mostly party-line vote of 53-44, with two Democrats voting in favor of the legislation and one Republican voting against it.

The bill directs the PSC, in writing its rate-making orders, to ensure that the utility costs of large data centers aren’t passed off to any other customer, but doesn’t offer specific directions on how to do that. It includes language stating that developers must hire Wisconsin workers to the extent possible.

The legislation also would require that any renewable energy facility that primarily serves the load of a large data center be located on the data center property.

“This will improve reliability by reducing dependence on a distant power grid and safeguards our communities from being burdened with large energy projects that exist solely to serve data center facilities elsewhere,” Quinn said.

The bill also requires the water used at a center to be recycled, and includes requirements that data center developers post a bond that can be used to reclaim the property if the project is abandoned before it’s completed.

Earlier, Stroud said the GOP bill’s requirement restricting renewable energy to on-site at data centers would be “a non-starter for many of the companies seeking to locate in our state.”

In his testimony, however, Quinn defended the provision as a safeguard against saddling other customers with the data centers’ energy costs. “I believe we should make it more attractive for data centers to build their own power supply,” he said.

Sen. Melissa Ratcliff (D-Cottage Gove) asked Quinn why he and Zimmerman didn’t work with Sinykin and Stroud on a common piece of legislation. Quinn replied that the provisions the Democrats prioritized wouldn’t pass in the current Legislature, including the prevailing wage provision and the renewable energy provisions.

During her portion of the hearing, Habush Sinykin said the provision for recycling water in the Republican bill was of interest to her. She also emphasized that lawmakers should work together across the aisle on legislation to address the broader concerns about data centers.

“The Senate is here through March, and the Assembly can be called back as well,” Habush Sinykin said. “I believe it makes sense and the conditions warrant a call for a special session or an extraordinary session, because people in Wisconsin do not want to wait another year or more to have regulation filling this vacuum.”

Tom Content, executive director of the Citizens Utility Board, testified that affordability was a top concern for Wisconsin ratepayers.

“Electricity costs are surging at a pace higher than inflation over the past four years,” Content told the committee. “Wisconsin has the second highest electricity rates in the Midwest.”

His organization “recognizes the intent of the authors on both sides to shield customers from higher costs,” Content said. “Our hope and expectation, given that affordability is job one right now, is that lawmakers will work together in the remaining days of the session and across the aisle to take the most workable provisions of both and find common ground on a plan that the governor will sign into law.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The entrance to the Wisconsin Assembly chambers. (Baylor Spears | Wisconsin Examiner)

The Wisconsin Assembly passed a bill to protect against lawsuits intended to discourage news coverage and quiet speech, as well as measures requiring schools to adopt policies on appropriate communications between staff and students and establishing a definition of antisemitism during a Tuesday floor session.

Assembly lawmakers plan to meet again on Wednesday and Thursday to vote on legislation with the intention of wrapping their work up this legislative session by the end of the week. Lawmakers did not complete votes on every bill they had scheduled before recessing for the State of the State address in the evening. 

Anti-SLAPP legislation passes

AB 701, to protect people from Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP), passed on a voice vote. It now goes to the Senate for consideration. 

Rep. Jim Piwowarczyk (R-Hubertus), who is the co-founder of the right-wing publication Wisconsin Right Now, said the bill would strengthen protections for free speech and civic participation and ensure that citizens aren’t silenced through “abusive litigation.” 

“The bill creates a clear, efficient process for courts to quickly dismiss lawsuits that target protected speech or participation in government proceedings. It requires a prompt hearing and stays constant discovery while the motion is pending. It also allows prevailing parties to recover attorney fees,” Piwowarczyk said. “These protections help prevent the chilling effect prolonged and expensive litigation can have on free expression.”

The bill is based on model legislation developed by the nonprofit Uniform Law Commission. 

“It’s a legal tactic … designed to punish someone through stressful, time consuming and expensive litigation,” Rep. Andrew Hysell (D-Sun Prairie) said about SLAPP legislation on the floor, adding that these types of lawsuits target people “simply because they choose to exercise their First Amendment rights to speak.” 

“It’s overdue that an anti-SLAPP statute be added to Wisconsin laws. We need to protect our citizens’ First Amendment rights and protect those rights from legal retribution,” Hysell said. 

School communication policies

Lawmakers concurred in SB 673 in a 92-7 vote. It would require public school districts and private schools to adopt policies related to appropriate communications between staff and students. The bill will now go to Gov. Tony Evers for consideration. 

Schools would need to adopt new policies by Sept. 1, 2026 under the bill. 

The bill is one of several that lawmakers introduced in reaction to a November report from the CapTimes that found over 200 investigations into teacher licenses due to allegations of sexual misconduct or grooming from 2018 to 2023.

Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) said the bill would protect staff and students. The bill includes requirements that the policies include standards for appropriate content and appropriate methods of communication as well as training in identifying, preventing and reporting grooming and professional boundary violations.

The bill, Nedweski said, will protect students from “potentially predatory behavior with clear proactive protections, while also protecting well-intentioned employees who work every day with integrity and professionalism — protecting them from finding themselves in compromising situations where a misunderstanding or a false allegation could cause serious reputational harm.” 

The bill also requires that policies include consequences for employees or volunteers who violate the rules.

Private schools were included through an amendment to the bill. 

“As a parent of two public school kids, we should be doing whatever we can to make sure that our kids are safe in schools,” Rep. Mike Bare (D-Verona). said. “One of the most troubling things we heard in the series of legislative hearings on this topic is that kids who were in private schools are less safe than those who are in public schools. That’s because educators in private schools are not required to be licensed.” 

Antisemitism definition

AB 446 passed 66-33 with 11 Democrats joining Republicans in favor. The controversial bill would codify the definition for antisemitism adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance in 2016. It states that antisemitism is “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

The bill would require local and state governmental agencies to consider the IHRA definition and its examples when investigating allegations of racial, religious or ethnic discrimination.

Rep. Supreme Moore Omokunde (D-Milwaukee) said he was concerned that the bill would infringe on people’s First Amendment rights. 

“Many Jewish and Muslim work groups have come together to use this definition to establish a framework to help understand what antisemitism is,” Moore Omokunde said. But, he added, the intention was not for the definition to be codified into law.

Moore Omokunde said he is worried that the bill could be used to punish people for speaking out against  the actions of the Israeli government.

Rep. Lisa Subeck (D-Madison), who is Jewish, said she was frustrated with the opposition to the bill. 

“Antisemitism is real. We hear again and again, particularly since October 7th, that when acts of antisemitism occur, they’re not really antisemitic,” Subeck said. “I don’t spend a lot of time when somebody tells me about an act of homophobia, I don’t debate whether it was really homophobic. When somebody who has been a victim of bias, discrimination and worse, tells me what happens to them, I believe it.”

Subeck said the bill is the Legislature’s opportunity to take a “firm stand” against antisemitism.

The bill is now in the Senate.

The Assembly also passed a bill that would prohibit people from serving as a state Supreme Court justice or as a judge of a court of record after the age of 75; AB 640 passed on a 54-45 vote along party lines. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Research shows that children benefit from after-school programs, but four in five Wisconsin children are missing out. | Photo of girl on playground by Tang Ming Tung/Getty Images

I have visited many after-school and summer programs across Wisconsin, from large urban sites to small rural schools, and what I’ve seen has stayed with me. I’ve watched students immersed in creative writing, acting and robotics. I’ve observed staff working one-on-one with kids navigating intense emotional challenges. And I’ve seen the smiles on middle schoolers’ faces as they reconnect with trusted mentors at the end of the school day. These programs are not “extras”; they provide crucial support to kids, families, and entire communities.

The access gap

And yet, for far too many Wisconsin families, these opportunities remain out of reach. According to the latest America After 3PM report, nearly 275,000 Wisconsin children who would participate in after-school programs are not enrolled because none are available. Four in five children who could benefit from these supports are missing out. Parents cite cost, lack of transportation, and a simple lack of local programming as the biggest barriers.

The benefits are clear

The impact of these programs is undeniable. Parents overwhelmingly rate their children’s after-school programs as excellent or very good, reporting that they keep kids safe, build social skills, and support mental wellness. Research in Wisconsin shows that students who participate in extracurricular activities are less likely to report anxiety or depression and more likely to feel a sense of belonging.

Out-of-school time programs often provide the space for deep, long-term mentoring, a powerful protective factor in a young person’s life. While teachers are often stretched thin during the academic day, out-of-school time  staff can focus on the relational side of development.

The cost of instability

When funding is unstable, it undermines the very connections that make these programs transformative. Recently, a Boys & Girls Club director shared the human cost of budget constraints: they were forced to reduce a veteran staff member to part-time. This didn’t just trim a budget; it severed a multi-year mentorship. When that bond was broken, several youths stopped attending entirely.

Wisconsin lags behind national trends

Across the country, after-school and summer programs are increasingly viewed as essential to youth development. Twenty-seven states provide dedicated state funding for these programs; Wisconsin provides none. States as different as Alabama and Texas recognize that federal funding alone is not enough. So do our  Midwestern neighbors.

• Minnesota and Illinois have invested in these programs for years.
• Michigan established a $73 million grant program to expand before-school, after-school, and summer learning statewide.
• Pennsylvania created the $11.5 million Building Opportunity through Out-of-School Time (BOOST) program.

The opportunity to act

Public support for these programs is strong and bipartisan. Families across Wisconsin want safe, enriching opportunities for their children. With a significant budget surplus, Wisconsin is uniquely positioned to invest in its future.

State leaders should view out-of-school programming as a foundation for safety, mental health, and long-term economic opportunity. We have the resources; now we need the will. By committing to consistent state funding, we can ensure that every young person in Wisconsin has a place to belong when the school bell rings.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Eau Claire County Government Center | Photo by Frank Zufall/Wisconsin Examiner

This story was updated at 10 a.m. Wedensday with comments from Sheriff Riewestahl

Eau Claire County Sheriff Dave Riewestahl announced Tuesday that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents had detained four individuals, including one at a construction site in the city of Altoona and three others who fled and barricaded themselves in a garage in the town of Washington.

Riewestahl said his office was contacted by ICE agents who said they would be at a construction site in the city of Altoona, near the city of Eau Claire, to arrest a suspect who had allegedly assaulted a law enforcement officer.

After agents attempted  to arrest the suspect, Riewestahl said four individuals fled the site, and one was apprehended. The sheriff did not specify if the individual detained was the individual ICE was seeking.

The three who fled the scene entered a residence in the town of Washington, confronted a homeowner, then went into the garage. The homeowner then locked the door between the house and the garage.

Riewestahl said his office was called to address a criminal trespass to a dwelling, and then county deputies requested assistance by the city of Altoona police.

Upon the request of the homeowner, the sheriff said, his officers entered the home and attempted to gain voluntary compliance with the three individuals in the garage, but when verbal requests failed, the officers used pepperballs and the three surrendered.

Riewestahl said the three individuals who had trespassed at the town of Washington home were turned over to ICE agents. None of the four taken into ICE’s custody were detained at the Eau Claire County Jail.

“The reason the three were not detained locally is because the homeowner did not want to pursue criminal charges,” the sheriff told the Examiner. “So we did not do that. In talking with ICE, they said they had the authority to take them in custody for immigration activity, so we turned them over to immigration and immigration took all four of those individuals.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Appeals Court Judge Maria Lazar speaks at a Feb. 17 forum at the Marquette University law school. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Maria Lazar says she wants disagreements on the Court to be more respectful. 

At a Tuesday forum hosted by the Marquette University School of Law, Lazar attempted to distance herself from the highly politicized Supreme Court campaigns of recent years, painting herself as an independent judge who, while leaning more conservative than the Court’s current liberal majority, wants to just follow the law. 

However, since her election to the state’s District Two Court of Appeals, Lazar has been a reliably conservative vote on the reliably conservative appellate panel — including a case in which she sided with election deniers attempting to gain access to confidential voter information. Lazar’s campaign has also received endorsements and financial support from high profile Republicans. 

But she says she’s never been a member of a political party, contrasting herself with her opponent, Appeals Court Judge Chris Taylor, who was previously a Democratic member of the state Assembly. State Supreme Court races are nominally nonpartisan, but both political parties have been heavily involved in supporting their preferred candidates in recent years.  

“I am the one on my court that sort of solves the disputes, and I think that on the Supreme Court I would be the same way,” she said. “I know that it would be 3-4, and I know that I’d be in the minority with the more conservative leaning than liberal leaning, and I get that. But the decisions aren’t all 4-to-3. I mean, sometimes they’re 7-0 or 6-1, and I just think that I would bring a level of collegiality, a level of really hard dedication and work.” 

Since the liberal wing of the Court gained the majority with the election of Justice Janet Protasiewicz in 2023, the Court’s conservatives — most notably Justice Annette Ziegler and the outgoing Justice Rebecca Bradley — have frequently lobbed personal attacks at the majority in their published opinions, accusing the majority of being partisan lackeys for the Democratic party. 

Lazar said she doesn’t think the Court should work that way. 

“But some of the opinions written by our Court right now, the differences that are going on on that bench, there’s such a level of dissatisfaction with each other and personal animus that when you read those dissents, you say, how can you write something that personal and mean and then go and work the next day and sit across from that person and say, ‘Let’s talk about the next appeal?’” she said. 

Despite her efforts to paint herself as a moderate, Lazar has occasionally shared her agreement with conservative beliefs on abortion. As an attorney for the state Department of Justice under Gov. Scott Walker, Lazar defended Act 10, the law that repealed labor rights for public employees, and argued in favor of gerrymandered maps Republicans drew in 2011, locking in disproportionate GOP legislative majorities. 

“I would never be on that Court to be a firebrand,” Lazar said Tuesday. “I would be on that Court to stand up for what I believe in and what I believe the law says.” 

At the forum, Lazar said she can’t share with voters how she would decide hypothetical cases, but she can share “what I believe in and what I stand for.” The remark closely mirrors statements Protasiewicz made about her political beliefs during her 2023 campaign. Those remarks have followed Protasiewicz onto the bench, with Republicans often raising them to demand that she recuse herself from controversial cases. 

On her judicial philosophy, Lazar said she’s “an originalist with a slight tinge of textualism.” 

Originalism is a legal theory that emerged in the 1980s and has become the dominant ideology of conservative justices across the country. Under the theory, judges argue that laws should be interpreted through the intent and context of the law when it was written — attempting to glean the motivations of the country’s constitutional framers 250 years after the fact. Critics argue that originalists often use flawed historical analysis. 

But at the forum, Lazar gave a different meaning to originalism. 

“Originalist means that if you get the statute or the law or the constitutional amendment or whatever it is, you look at it first, and if you can’t answer the question, which you probably can’t, because why is it in front of your court if it’s so obvious? So you look at it, and then you look at headings. You look at statutes around it, you look at other statutes in the law. You start looking around. And that’s originalism. You’re looking at the words as they’re written,” she said. 

Lazar said that trying to determine the intent of legislators gets dangerous. 

“Now, some judicial philosophies go all the way out. And they look at everything, what people say when they write the laws, what their intent was, and that’s a little dangerous,” she said. “To me, that’s judicial activism, because I see judges and justices who get to the end result in their mind and then find a way to get there. That’s not the proper way to look at the law, and that’s not what we do. We don’t legislate on the bench. We’re not activists. We don’t have agendas.” 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Rev. Jesse L. Jackson Sr. at an encampment dubbed "Resurrection City," at the close of the Poor People's March at the National Mall in Washington D.C., in May 1968. (Photo by Pix/Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Tributes poured in across the country for the revered civil rights figure the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson Sr., who died Tuesday morning at 84.

The two-time Democratic presidential hopeful and Greenville, South Carolina, native died peacefully, surrounded by his kin, according to his family. 

Jackson, who was active in the civil rights movement as a college student, worked alongside the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. as a young adult before King’s 1968 assassination.

Leading his own political movement, Jackson became known for his populist message, charismatic delivery and organizing prowess that elevated the role and influence of Black political leaders and helped shape the modern Democratic Party.

“Our father was a servant leader — not only to our family, but to the oppressed, the voiceless, and the overlooked around the world,” Jackson’s family said in a statement. 

“We shared him with the world, and in return, the world became part of our extended family,” his family added. “His unwavering belief in justice, equality, and love uplifted millions, and we ask you to honor his memory by continuing the fight for the values he lived by.”

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, a Democrat, ordered flags to fly at half-staff Tuesday in Jackson’s honor in the state where he lived and worked for many years.

The family statement did not list a cause of death. Jackson was diagnosed in 2013 with Parkinson’s disease. His diagnosis was updated last year to progressive supranuclear palsy, according to a November statement from the Rainbow PUSH Coalition that Jackson founded.

Tributes from Obama, Trump and Biden

Former President Barack Obama, the first Black president, and his wife, Michelle Obama, said Jackson’s runs for the presidency “laid the foundation” for Barack Obama’s successful 2008 campaign. And Chicago native Michelle Obama’s “first glimpse of political organizing” was at the Jacksons’ kitchen table, they said.

“From organizing boycotts and sit-ins, to registering millions of voters, to advocating for freedom and democracy around the world, he was relentless in his belief that we are all children of God, deserving of dignity and respect,” they wrote. “Reverend Jackson also created opportunities for generations of African Americans and inspired countless more, including us.”

President Donald Trump paid tribute, dubbing Jackson “a force of nature like few others before him” and a “good man, with lots of personality, grit, and ‘street smarts,’” in a social media post Tuesday.  

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, the highest-ranking Black member of Congress, honored Jackson as a “legendary voice for the voiceless, powerful civil rights champion and trailblazer extraordinaire,” in a social media post. 

“For decades, while laboring in the vineyards of the community, he inspired us to keep hope alive in the struggle for liberty and justice for all,” the New York Democrat said.

Jeffries expressed gratitude for Jackson’s “incredible service” to the country and “profound sacrifice as the people’s champion.” 

Former President Joe Biden called Jackson “a man of God and of the people. Determined and tenacious. Unafraid of the work to redeem the soul of our Nation.” 

South Carolina legacy

U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn, a South Carolina Democrat and longtime friend of Jackson, said the civil rights leader lived a life “defying odds,” in a statement Tuesday.  

“Reverend Jackson showed us that if we all work together – we can bend the arc of the moral universe and change history,” Clyburn said while also pointing to Jackson’s impact on “the nation, Black Americans, and movements to encourage civic participation around the world.” 

U.S. Sen. Tim Scott, a South Carolina Republican who is the party’s highest-ranking Black elected official, honored Jackson’s legacy as a leader and role model.

“I don’t have to agree with someone politically to deeply respect the role Jesse Jackson, a South Carolina native, played in uplifting Black voices and inspiring young folks to believe their voices mattered,” Scott wrote on social media. “Those that empower people to stand taller always leave a lasting mark. Rest in peace.”

Jackson’s legacy will live on in the next generation, South Carolina state Sen. Deon Tedder said during a news conference Tuesday. 

“The future generation, they’re picking up that torch, they’re picking up that mantle,” said Tedder, a Democrat, gesturing to students from the state’s historically Black colleges and universities. “The baton has been passed, and now what you see is the future.”

South Carolina state Rep. Hamilton Grant recalled seeing Jackson at the July 9, 2015, signing ceremony of the law that removed the Confederate flag from Statehouse grounds entirely. The flag was taken down the next day, 15 years after it came off the Statehouse dome in a compromise Jackson opposed. 

“For him, being from South Carolina, to see that moment, and me being there in close proximity with him, meant the world to me,” Grant told the South Carolina Daily Gazette. He said Jackson paved the way for Black leaders like him and helped instill in him pride in his identity.

The South Carolina House and Senate held moments of silence in Jackson’s honor Tuesday. 

“There are so many little boys and little girls in South Carolina who can look in the mirror now and say, ‘I am somebody!’ because of this native son,” state Sen. Karl Allen, a Democrat, said.

Shaping Democratic politics

Jackson leaves behind a legacy of political and social justice work that spanned decades. 

He founded the Rainbow PUSH Coalition, a national social justice organization whose name evoked Jackson’s multiracial voter base and the theme of his 1984 Democratic National Convention speech. That organization was formed by a merger between Operation PUSH, which Jackson founded in 1971, and the Rainbow Coalition.

In his 1988 bid for the presidency, Jackson based his campaign in Iowa prior to that state’s presidential caucuses and made the official announcement of his candidacy at a farm in Greenfield on Oct. 10, 1987. 

He finished in fourth place in the caucuses but went on to briefly become the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination by winning a coalition of Black and Latino voters and white liberals, though he ultimately came in second in delegates to Michael Dukakis. 

Similar blocs propelled Obama to victory two decades later and continue to form national Democrats’ base.

Two of Jackson’s sons, Jesse Jackson Jr. and Jonathan Jackson, would represent Illinois in the U.S. House. Jonathan Jackson remains in office after first winning election in 2022.

U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, a democratic socialist from Vermont who endorsed Jackson’s 1988 campaign, said in a Tuesday statement Jackson had been a friend and ally for nearly 40 years and credited Jackson with founding modern progressivism.

“His creation of the Rainbow Coalition, a revolutionary idea at the time, that developed a grassroots movement of working people — Black, white, Latino, Asian-American, Native-American, gay and straight — laid the foundation for the modern progressive movement which is continuing to fight for his vision of economic, racial, social and environmental justice,” Sanders wrote. “Jackson has had a profound impact upon our country. His politics of togetherness and solidarity should guide us going forward.”

‘Equal justice is not inevitable’

Georgia U.S. Sen. Raphael Warnock, a Democrat and a Baptist pastor, recalled the influence Jackson’s presidential runs had on a young Warnock growing up in public housing.

“With an eloquence and rhythmic rhetoric all his own, Jesse Jackson reminded America that equal justice is not inevitable,” he said. “It requires vigilance and commitment, and for freedom fighters, sacrifice. His ministry was poetry and spiritual power in the public square. He advanced King’s dream and bent the arc of history closer to justice.”

Jaime Harrison, a former chair of the Democratic National Committee, said Jackson’s 1988 run, which culminated with a speech at the party convention that lauded the United States’ multiracial identity, inspired him.

As “a poor Black kid from South Carolina,” Harrison said he was drawn to Jackson’s command of the convention hall after accumulating more than 1,000 delegates.

“He did not win the nomination,” Harrison wrote. “But he won our imagination.”

Adrian Ashford contributed to this report.